Political Equality in Baltimore County Zoning Laws?
Baltimore County and patriot Steve Kolbe are still at odds over the enforcement of an“alleged” Baltimore County violation to force Mr. Kolbe to remove a 4 foot by 8 foot Ehrlich for Governor lawn sign. Mr. Kolbe received a citation exactly one week to the day from the sign’s installation, and he was required to remove it one week from the date of notice, or face a $200 a day fine. Mr. Kolbe complied with the order, but has chosen to proceed in court citing his right to express his freedom of speech.
Fast forward to yesterday; when this reporter spotted a similar size sign in a residential area of Baltimore County. The sign this time is for Kevin Kamenetz, a Democratic candidate for Baltimore County Executive. Surely Mr. Kamenetz had read about the stir caused by the Ehrlich sign on Mr. Kolbe’s property, one would have to live under a rock not to have heard about it, by all the media attention that was given to the issue. The property this sign rests on is in the road easement in front of the development “West Padonia,” from developer Tom Brooks, the actual address is 941 West Padonia Rd.
Even with my basic grasp of math, the 4 foot by 8 foot sign equates to 32 square feet, the same exact size of the sign that Mr. Kolbe had to remove from his property last month.
A bigger question now will be; will this sign be allowed to stand without citation from Baltimore County Zoning, or will the owner of this property be given the same time to remove it or face fines equal to Mr. Kolbe’s ?
Improvise, Adapt and Overcome
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
I know I said I was going on vacation and not write again until the fall. Something made me think of this last night and it just would not get out of my head. I knew that if I didn’t write this, I would regret not doing it. So……..
Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt. Before Barack Obama, history has shown that these three men were the biggest destroyers of liberty ever to occupy the White House, each a hero of the progressive movement in the United States, each in their own right clearing a path for another progressive to come in and move the country more towards a progressive utopia, each one ultimately falling short of their goals.
I don’t think Obama’s agenda is quite the same as the other three. Where the other three tried and failed in setting up a European style socialist state here in America, I think Obama has a different idea on where to take the country. Where the Roosevelts and Wilson wanted the country to be a far left total government control, I think Obama actually wants the country to go in the opposite direction. I believe that Obama actually wants to collapse the government not so as to set up a socialist style form of government but to get rid of government all together. I believe Obama is not a socialist but an anarchist.
Before you dismiss me, think about a few things. Other than Hillary Clinton, who has Obama put into office that is more loyal to the Democratic Party than they are to Obama and his ideas? From Van Jones, to Anita Dunn, to John Podesta to Valerie Jarrett. These are no party loyalist; they are all anti-government radicals all in some way being funded by one means or another by George Soros, himself an anti-government capitalist opportunist who made a fortune off the collapse of the British sterling. Van Jones said it himself: “We don’t want to fix the system, we want a new system”.
Why would you sign into law a health care bill that does nothing to fix the problems of healthcare? Why would you want to bring known terrorist onto American soil and give them constitutional rights? Why would you not secure the borders when you have indisputable proof that terrorist are crossing that same border? Why would you put a known supporter of Hugo Chavez in the FCC and give him authority equal to that of the FCC chairman? Why would you loan $2 Billion to an extremely profitable company that George Soros is heavily invested in? Why would you purposely put 20,000 oil rig and support workers out of work knowing that the companies that own the rigs can’t afford to have them sitting idle? Why allow and environmental disaster to continue and stop all outside influences from correcting or minimizing the situation? Why would you protect the thugs and crooks of ACORN and SEIU? Lastly, why the need to fill every government department and agency with a czar that answers to no one but the office of the President?
Obama once stated that the Constitution gets in the way of government. If something gets in the way of the military, they in turn improvise, adapt and overcome the obstacle so they can complete their mission. In Obama’s case, the obstacle is the Constitution.
If my theory is correct and Obama is an anarchist as I suspect, some pretty sharp and committed minds had to be behind the planning of this. Where the Roosevelts and Wilson failed, Obama just might succeed. Wilson, Teddy & FDR all played on public support once they were in office. They used public emotions to set things in motion and then used that emotion to rally congress to do their bidding. Of course they were all in power before Cloward & Piven and Saul Alinsky all came to the forefront of the progressive movement.
In St. Louis, a man was beaten by multiple SEIU thugs and the government refused to prosecute. In Philadelphia, members of the black panthers stood outside voting places and intimidated voters verbally while wielding night sticks. Again, the government refused to prosecute. In fact, since Obama came into office, not one federal prosecution has been conducted against a member of leftist organization who committed a violent act. Why?
Illegals are not being prosecuted, but actually protected by the federal government. Union thugs and radical members of ethnic racial groups allowed bully and intimidate the citizens of this country. Our president arrogantly ignores the majority of the people, Congress passes legislation that is destroying the economy, Executive orders being issued and not challenged so as to avoid the courts, Czars not being vetted, Bankers and oil executives being vilified. A government that now controls over 70% of the economy and spending money uncontrollably. This is a perfect storm in the making. All it needs is something to set everything in motion.
As Rahm Emanuel said, “never let a crisis go to waste”. Obama and his thugs have taken advantage of every situation to circumvent he system to achieve more power and control. Yet the prize still eludes him. What is the prize you ask? That is a simple answer, what did Obama say gets in the way of government? The Constitution. Obama and his handlers know every trick in the book thanks to the likes of Cloward/Piven and Alinsky as to how to get around everything but the constitution.
So, how do you get around the constitution? The answer is by using the powers that are allowed by the constitution against it.
Like I said, Obama has all the ingredients for the making of the perfect storm: an angry public, thugs and crooks in power in every department of government and an economy imploding. Remember Rahm Emanuel (never let a crisis go to waste), you need one crisis to destroy this country and the constitution and you need look no further than Greece. That’s right, all he and his handlers need is nationwide civil unrest. Obama needs that one thing so that he may declare Martial Law. Martial law is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, but the suspension of habeas corpus is mentioned in Article 1, Section 9, and the activation of the militia in time of rebellion or invasion is mentioned in Article 1, Section 8.
The constitution is the enemy of Obama and progressive anarchist. You can’t attack it head on because eventually the constitution will prevail, so you must improvise and adapt to overcome your enemy (the constitution). Use the powers of the constitution against the constitution to defeat it. Suspend habeas corpus and with nothing left to keep the government in check, remember, he has all his anarchist cronies already in place to prevent retribution, Obama, Soros, Van Jones, Bill Ayers and the like have the power to do as they please and as Commander – in – Chief, what can the military do but ensure he stays in power.
May God prevent this from ever happening.
Two stories this week with conflicting Whitehouse messages
The first story is the oil spill that will never end. In Sept 2009 TransOcean was given permission to drill in the Gulf off the coast of Louisiana. The first request made by BP was to drill in 500ft of water and was approved by the state of Louisiana, but the request was denied in its final form by the Federal Government, they told BP the drilling had to be in 5000ft of water regardless of the fact that no oil spill had ever been worked on in 5000ft of water.
Later this week a Federal judge ruled that President Obama’s 6 month moratorium on drilling on only certain oil rigs was unfounded according to the experts he consulted about the leak. Not one of the experts suggested he shut down all drilling. Robert Gibbs told reporters after the federal case that …. “President Barack Obama believes strongly that drilling at such depths does not make sense and puts the safety of workers "at a danger that the president does not believe we can afford."
Now if this is in fact true, why was it that the federal government told BP they had to drill in deeper water? Another troubling question is why did the federal government agency,Export-Import Bank give 2 billion to Petrobra, a Brazillian oil drilling company to do basically the same thing BP did but in 3 times deeper water?
The second story has to do with another Federal Judge who ruled on Tuesday that it will now be illegal to donate any money to a terrorist organization, even if labeled as “humanitarian aid”. Since 2006 Hamas has been on the official State Department Terrorist Organization List. Shortly after his inauguration, Barack Obama showed his intention of backing this group that had been previously funded by Saudi Arabia and Iran, by promising $900 million to Hamas for “reconstruction”. Recently he added to that total by another $400 million.
Nothing has changed in the political climate with these terrorists, and yet this administration continues to support them. If the definition of treason includes giving comfort and aid to the enemy, President Barack Obama has filled both requirements, and I for one want to know when he will be charged.
How many times do I get to vote again?
REAL Americans know that when voting time comes, we get to vote ONCE and only once. Liberals have never played by the same rules and Federal Judge Stephen Robinson thinks similarly, he cited that the “one person one vote” idea violated the Voting Rights Act in Port Chester, NY. A town of nearly 50% Latino population of approx. 30,000 residents had no representation in the six trustee seats. This town of a majority of white voters was told that Latinos would be allowed to vote six times to compensate for low Latino representation in government.
One has to wonder what this Judge is thinking when it comes to the “will of the people.” I don’t see how this obvious violation of the “intent of the law” can be left to stand. Hopefully a law suit will appeal this travesty of justice and the right of the voters. Hopefully this Judge can be run out of the state on a rail, and even better have his license removed to practice law in the future!
William G Burmer
There was a time when one was expected to live within their means, saved, paid cash for their needs, and owed no one. They also mended socks and other clothing, made due and wore out. We each need to reevaluate our needs and set better priorities. Truth is we have become a debtor nation of people with little to no assets we can call our own. Essentially we have fallen prey to the first five planks of the communist manifesto. See chapter eight which contains the manifesto.
“No other banking system in the world was quite like it. It was the emancipation of the Treasury. New York bankers could not in the future go to Washington, as Mr. J.P. Morgan had done in 1895, and issue decrees to the President and people. Nor could there be holdup of the financial affairs of the country by business men who happened to have control of the New York bank reserves . . . the Secretary of the Treasury and the new Board would determine the movement and location of the surplus moneys in the country.” 4. On the surface it would appear that this act was legitimate in every respect. However, close investigation makes clear that “The Federal
Reserve Act is in direct violation of the Constitution, because no provision was ever made by the People for it. Congress by delegating this power to the Fed is in violation of the Supreme law of the land, the Constitution for the United States.” 5. The 10th Amendment says: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
At the very least a referendum should have occurred prior to incorporation. More importantly incorporation of the Federal Reserve System violated state Banking Rights. We along with our Senators were asleep at the switch!
“Congress cannot delegate or sign over its authority to any individual, corporation or foreign nation. 16th Corpus Juris Secundum, No 141.’ In the words of chief justice John Marshall February 1803: “The powers of the legislature are defined, and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is the limitation committed to writing, if these limits may at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction, between a government with limited and unlimited powers, is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed, are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by and ordinary act,” U.S. Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 368.’
“The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, whether federal or state, though having the form and name of law, is in realty no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose, since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.” ‘16th American Jurisprudence, No 256.’ The supremacy of the Constitution as described in the Federalist papers #78 made it clear that “No legislative act . . . contrary to the
Constitution can be valid.” Its supremacy is to be preserved by the Supreme Court. (Ital. Added.)
“The Federal reserve Act, as passed by Congress December 23rd, 1913, has since become the (second) biggest fraud, (after the 16th Amendment,) in the history of this country. Its passage occurred because of self-serving politicians (admittedly, a redundant term) that were more interested in lining their pockets, than upholding their oath of office.’ (Ital. Added with parenthesis)
“All of our Founding Fathers had firsthand experience with bankers and paper money. They absolutely detested the notion that any man could issue notes based upon fractional reserves, thereby creating wealth for himself out of thin air. Most of the Founders were men of wealth, and they came upon that wealth by working hard for it, not by fraud, deceit, and plunder. Gold and silver are recognized around the world for their tangible wealth, because someone has to work very hard to get it out of the earth. How much effort does a banker expend in applying ink to paper to create a fractional reserve note? Not only did they abhor banks, they also disdained paper currency in general, because of their experience with the Continental Currency. In January 1779, The Continental Note was trading 8 to 1 against the Spanish milled Dollar, and by November of that year, it was trading 38 to 1. In January 1781 it was trading 100 to 1, and by
May of that year they ceased to pass as currency and quietly died in the hands of their bearers.
The Phrase “Worthless as a Continental” was widely heard in these times. It was for these reasons that the Founders forever mandated the use of an honest money system of gold and silver coin, and established it through the U.S. Constitution.’ “Prior to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the United States government coined, and issued our money debt free. The only lawful and Constitutional forms of money were (and still are) gold and silver coin. Acting upon the powers granted them by the Constitution, the Congress ratified the Coinage Act on April 2, 1792, which specified lawful money to be only gold or silver coin, and the denomination to be based upon a standard unit of weight---a Dollar (371.25 grains of fine silver), based upon the Spanish milled Dollar of silver, then widely in circulation in the sovereign States. The Coinage Act dramatically simplified the process of issuing a standard coin into circulation. At no cost, the individual could take his silver or gold dust, shavings, or bullion to the mint, and have it melted down and pressed into coin. Now it was guaranteed to be a standard weight and purity.’
“The Coinage Act specifies the weight and substance of the Dollar to be: ***Silver---412.5 grains, 90% pure, 10% alloy added for strength and durability. ***Gold---27.5 grains, 90% pure, 10% alloy added for strength and durability.” 6.
In the United States Code (USC Title 12 SS 152) “The terms “lawful money’ and ‘lawful money of the United States’ shall be construed to mean gold and silver coin of the United States.”
Some enlightening comments relative to the Federal Reserve come from some of our former leaders in the Congress: Representative Wright Patman from Texas, a Democrat of the 72nd to the 86th Congress (4 March to January 3, 1976), chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee said: “In the United States we have, in effect, two governments . . . We have the duly
Constituted Government . . . Then we have an independent, uncontrolled and uncoordinated government in the Federal Reserve System, operating the money powers which, constitutionally, are reserved to Congress. He further stated in the Congressional Record (May 5, 1975) . . . ‘the Federal Reserve System has never been subjected to a complete, independent audit, and it is the only important agency that refuses to consent to an audit by the Congress’s own agency, the General Accounting Office . . . GAO audits of the Federal Reserve will, moreover, fill the glaring gap that now exists in the information about the Fed’s activities and programs. As things now stand, the only information that we get on programs of the Fed is what they Fed itself wants us to have.” In truth much is available from the Federal Reserve about itself by just asking any bank. It is the Treasury Department that is most silent and secretive about its dealings with the Federal Reserve. Congressman Louis T. McFadden Republican, Banker while Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee, introduced a resolution indicting the Federal Reserve Board of Governors January 13, 1932. “The resolution preamble read: ‘Whereas I charge them,
jointly and severally, with the crime of having treasonably conspired and acted against the peace and security of the United States and conspired to destroy constitutional government in the United States.’ McFadden had good cause to level such charges, Section 19 of the Coinage Act States: “If any of the said officers or persons shall embezzle any of the METALS (Emphasis Added). Every such officer or person who shall commit any or either of the said offenses, shall be guilty of felony, and shall suffer death.” 7. “Only five Congressmen stood with Him and the resolution failed. The House Republican majority leader remarked, “Louis T. McFadden is now politically dead.” A whispering campaign that McFadden was insane swept Washington, and the press was more than happy to assist in the character assassination.
In the next Congressional elections, huge contributions found their way to his opponent, and as a direct result of being outspent and publicly vilified as a “fruitcake,” McFadden was overwhelmingly defeated. He was in fact more than just “politically dead.” McFadden “mysteriously died,” as the papers reported, in 1936, after three attempts on his life. Truth be known, he was poisoned.” In addition he once accused the Federal Reserve Board of “having caused the greatest depression we have ever known.” 8.
Our present Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank Alan Greenspan (in 2000) was once an ardent foe of the very system he now serves. In his own words: “The abandonment of the gold standard made it possible for the welfare statists (meaning the government) to use the banking system as a means to an unlimited expansion of credit . . .” In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. (Remember inflation is a tax) There is no safe store of value . . . Deficit spending (using FRNs) is simply a scheme for the “hidden” confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights.” Ital Added. (a) Mr. Greenspan enjoyed politics after becoming an advisor to Nixon and Ford he was hooked. He served on several boards of prestigious companies, and even owned his own consulting firm. He was eventually chosen for a directorship of J.P. Morgan and Company; for which “Fortune” magazine wrote as coming near to receiving “Knighthood.” He thereafter became very silent about his criticisms of the FED. In 1987 President Reagan appointed him as Chairman of the FED, a post he secretly coveted. Is it not interesting how positions of power, prestige and money can corrupt?
1. Woodrow Wilson p307
2. Ibid. p307
3. Ibid. p 309
4. Woodrow Wilson and His Work. p 141
5. Economic Solutions. p 2
6. Ibid. pp. 8-9
7. Ibid. p 15
8. Who Was Who in American Politics? p 399
9. Constitutional Law. p 12
Next: The Communist Manifesto, just for fun.
“WE THE PEOPLE” and the American Constitution
By: William Grant Burmer ISBN 978-1-4363-2186-0
Available at Barnes and Noble and other fine book stores
I’m confused Mr. President, could you please answer a question for me?
If Russia, or Iran, or Afghanistan, or say Cuba was invading our southern border, would you defend us? Then why sir are you avoiding the situation and ignoring the very thing you swore an oath to do? During your inauguration you promised to uphold the Constitution and to protect the citizens of this country, and yet during your 18 months in office you have done neither!
You have continually violated the Constitution that the conservatives of this country hold dear. You view the Constitution as a “living document”……..aka a moving target, and yet most of the American people view it as the laws that govern us. You refuse to admit that according to even the liberal MSNBC online poll that 96% of America agrees with the Arizona law against illegal aliens. Why is it that WE see the need for Arizona to protect themselves when you won’t? Why is it that the Arizona law mirrors the federal law that YOU refuse to administer?
We see Americans being killed on their own property, while you insist on apologizing to a critical Mexican President. We see American citizens being denied the ability to even visit the Arizona areas south of Phoenix because of the Mexican drug lord invasion of our country.
What country has to invade us before we react to repel the invasion? Is any one country worse than another?
Our President has shown through his actions in the past that he wants to multi task, by shoving every social initiative down our collect throats, and yet he can’t seem to address an invasion of our country!
You wanted this job sir, now act like a leader and do something about it or we will find someone who will!
Women Leading The Way
The latest round of state primaries proved what many expected; women would be leading the resurgence of conservatism in America. I for one am glad to see it. In my own little humble opinion, America is tired of members of the same Good Ol’ Boy network of politicians running for office. Many have been stating that America needs to change direction in order to return to glory.
Again, in my humble opinion, women are by nature more conservative than men in most areas including politics. No, I am not saying that men are generally to the left of Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Claire McCaskell as this trio tends to be more on the outer left fringe of the political spectrum. Just IMHO women are more likely to be more cautious, more conservative, more analytical and more likely to know what the pulse of America truly is.
Minorities are also starting to get deeper into politics. As anyone noticed that the rising political stars among minority men happen to be conservative? I have. Other than black theology churches, most black Christian churches speak more on traditional values, family unity and personal responsibility than white Christian churches do. I for one am glad to see minority politicians finally coming to the forefront of the political world and standing for the principals they were taught in church and at home.
America has needed a new direction to go in for quite some time, but as usual, the political parties have prevented this from happening. Take for instance the election in South Carolina GOP primary race. The establishment got burned badly by Nikki Haley and the people of South Carolina. Though she has not yet won the GOP nomination, she ran some 25+ points higher than the State GOP backed Gresham Barrett. The same held true in California and Nevada, the establishment candidate lost. Even though Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) is a democrat, even she came under attack from the far left for not being progressive enough by the Unions and left wing Community Organizations.
America is tired of the same old politics and sick of new faces coming to Washington and then doing and acting the same as the person they were elected to replace. Thomas Jefferson once wrote to James Madison on his views of why a little rebellion every now and then is a good thing. Now I won’t go as far as to say that it should be accompanied by armed conflict or other violent action as Jefferson did, but times are different now than they were is the 1780’s. Today we have media outlets, public assemblies and ballot boxes with which to wage rebellion against the government. America is witnessing a modern day rebellion. So long as the conservative rebellions continue to be non-violent, this rebellion will again in my humble little old opinion, continue to grow as we of this nation continue to sicken over an ever encroaching and increasing powerful federal government.
**Personal Note: It has been a wonderful 2+ years writing for Al’s page. I would like to thank all of you for reading my opinions and providing comments. I am going to be taking a couple of months off from writing and thinking about politics in general. Instead, I will be visiting the outer banks of North Carolina in a couple of weeks and then enjoying the summer with my wife, daughter, grand-daughter and our respective families.
I wish all of you a safe and happy summer and if Al will have me back, I will be back writing opinions in the fall.
Banking and Currency Reforms
William G. Burmer
For almost Twenty-Five years prior to ratification of the 16th amendment, the federal government received its revenues from property taxes, tariffs and excise taxes. Wealth was centered in the banking institutions, and large corporations. There resulted a growing division, spurred on by the politicians, among the classes. Banking interest prior to the beginning of the 20th century were privately controlled and concentrated in the hands of only a few wealthy financiers, known as the “Money Trusts” who used their positions to increase their own economic power rather than to serve the public.
The panic of 1907 had stimulated bankers, under the leadership of Republican Senator Nelson Aldrich, to try to substitute a centralized banking system that would replace the existing inelastic and unscientific credit structure. A National Monetary Commission studied the banking systems of the world and made a report to Congress in 1911 and 1912. A plan was drawn up by Paul M. Warburg, (a) of Kuhn Loeb and Company, and endorsed by the American Bankers Association. A large central institution (This information is taken from a modern text, the word “central, or centralized bank, was not a popular subject in the halls of Congress in 1911-12. Some in the Congress were still aware of what our founders knew about central banking) was proposed, with fifteen regional branches which would administer control over member banks, there would be no government controls.
“President Wilson desired to form a banking system controlled by a government board on which government appointees would manage its affairs. The United States (congress) was to supposed to be responsible for the issue of currency . . . secured by Solid Assets and a gold reserve. “Frank Glass rebelled against control of the reserve system by the government board; he dreaded the possibility of political interference with sound banking.” 1. Ital. added.
Sound banking means that any currency made or issued would be backed up with gold reserves. Wilson presented his plan to the joint session of Congress personally; the principles he espoused were clear, “There must be a currency “readily, elastically responsive to sound credit, a mobilization of (gold) reserves for legitimate uses, a ban on concentration of reserves for speculative purposes, and controls vested in the government, so that the banks may be the instruments, not the masters of business and of individual enterprise and initiative.” 2.
Paul Wartburg, then president of the American Bankers Association assailed Wilson’s plan to form a Federal Reserve as “an invasion of the liberty of the Citizens,” and ‘unjust and un-American.’ (Noble, however hypocritical words from one of the main architects of the Federal Reserve System, he and six other Bankers and Economist had three years previous secretly met and created it in November 1910; In addition, Wartburg had not received his U.S. CITIZENSHIP until 21 March 1911) (b) Elihu Root, a Republican senator from New York and Chairman of the RNC in 1912, feared that Wilson’s plan would: . . . “Bring inflation and create a vanishing gold supply.” Senator Root was correct; between 1913 and 1929 all of our Gold was used to pay interest to the Federal Reserve on all the money borrowed by our congress. The Central Banking system so despised by our founders was about to be unveiled. To spite all the political wrangling and predictions, above cited, the Carter Glass Bill was passed by Congress on December 19, 1913 with a vote of 54 to 34. The Senate passed the Bill on 22 December, and the Federal Reserve Act was on President Wilson’s desk for signature 23 December 1913.
Senator Robert Owen (R, OK), Chairman of the Senate Banking and Currency Committee and sponsor of the bill in the Senate was there with Carter Glass. We see here three of the four (c) principle players who formulated what John Adams warned about with regards to Central Banking at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. “The Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the principles and form of our Constitution. I am an enemy to all banks, discounting bills or notes for anything but coin. If the American people allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.” 3.
The Federal Reserve Board was assigned quarters in the Building of the Secretary of the Treasury. Carter Glass was Treasury Secretary at the time. He was “an ex-officio” member of the Board. On November 16, 1914, 9:00 AM, the doors of 12 brand new Federal Reserve Banks opened for business with its main office in New York City.
(a) Paul M. Warburg’s earliest roots are found in Mr. Simon von Cassel who expired in 1556. Simon lived in a town called “Warburg” in central Germany. Because the German Jew was denied a sir name many took on the name of the town, village or farm they lived or were born in after liberation by Bismarck in 1862. Simons Great Grandson Juspa-Joseph took on the name of Warburg and moved his family north to Hamburg where they found refuge in a Jewish settlement in Antonia near the entrance to the Elb River. Here the family began to prosper and eventually, while mingling with the Dutch, Danish, and French cultures, their influence in commerce grew with each succeeding generation of the Warburg family. Paul was born the third child to Moritz M. Warburg and Charlotte Oppenheim in 1868. Paul moved to America to run the family’s’ Kuhn Loeb investment firm in New York. Here he wrote passionately about the virtues of the Central Banking system in an essay entitled “Defects and Needs of Our Banking system.”
(b) Shortly after Paul Warburg received his Citizenship he was assigned to chair a seat on a National Citizens League to promote a sound banking system. In January of 1912 he with twenty other bankers and economists lobbied Teddy Roosevelt for support of their plan. Paul testified before the House banking committee in January 1913; one month after President Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Bill. Warburg was nominated to share a seat on the new Board. He was sworn into office on August 10, 1914. See Chernow, The Warburgs, pp 135-40.
(c) The fourth person would be (R.) Senator Nelson Aldrich, however, the original bill was changed in order to take him out of the loop. The altered bill was passed primarily due to Democratic support under Wm. J. Bryans’ endorsement after giving it the appearance of public control and Government Issue but which, in fact, did neither. The Democratic leadership was in truth duped by the Republicans into accepting the Legislation as excluding any central banking controls. It was, of course, amended several times after passage and given those controls.
1. Woodrow Wilson p307 Dodd, William E. (1920). Woodrow Wilson and His Works.
Double Day, Page, and Company.
2. Ibid. p307
3. Ibid. p 309
“WE THE PEOPLE” and the American Constitution
By: William Grant Burmer ISBN 978-1-4363-2186-0
Available at Barnes and Noble and other fine book stores
Expect an eventual BP bankruptcy
The biggest question is… will British Petroleum declare bankruptcy due to the spill in the Gulf? They have lost close to $88 billion in market value in the recent month, and shares make drop to a point of a hostile take-over from of all places…….China! Yes China needs oil resources, and has the necessary funds to purchase those unwanted shares.
Obama and his hostile administration have actually added to this problem by his repeated comments on the situation. Recent comments from the Whitehouse of “keeping his boot on the throat of BP,” and “looking for someone’s ass to kick,” have only served to demean BP, and drive stock prices even lower than they would have normally gone.
It seems to serve Obama and his administration well to publicly lambast, and demonize BP to sway public opinion towards his cap and trade bill that already passed congressional muster, but up until now sat teetering on the senate desk.
As time goes on with a continued oil leak Obama’s approval rating continues to fall, but it is this writer’s fear that the cap and trade bill will eventually gain more traction with democrats and environmental activists.
It is also my feeling that with liabilities to American soil increasing hourly, that somehow the Obama Administration will find some way to lay claim to BP even though it is a foreign company. In much the same way the Administration laid claim to GM and Chrysler by circumventing the bankruptcy court, I fear the Administration will seize US assets of BP and hold them ransom.
From the past 18 months of tyrannical reign, is it so far-fetched to see this one the horizon?
Walking Our Own Path
We have all done stupid things in our lives whether we want to admit it in public or not. Most of us at one point or another in our youth used the excuse that Johnny or Suzie did it and our parents had the classic response: “If they jumped off a building, would you?”
No one likes growing older, but hopefully, as we age, we get a little wiser during the process. We become able to make sound decisions that affect our lives. During this process, we also discover that sometimes there are no correct or incorrect answers. We come to understand that not everyone thinks the same, and that sometimes there is no such thing as one size fits all.
Children at a young age trust their parents to make the correct decisions for them. As they get older, they question why we sometimes have to say no and other times in similar situations we say yes. I know my kids did this quite often. As aggravating as it was sometimes, I always tried to give them the reasoning behind my decisions on a level that they could understand. Sometimes they got it and sometimes they didn’t.
I like to think that by me telling them the basis for many of the decisions I have made a difference in their lives and helped them to see beyond what was immediately in front of them and to think in big picture terms. Unfortunately, they still at times resort to the adage of living in the now and will deal with the consequences later. Since they are all grown and have moved out, the path that they walk is of their own making and by their own choices. Occasionally they ask for my opinion but as any parent would think, I don’t believe they ask it enough.
Everyone who is sitting at a computer screen reading this has chosen their own path in life. Many twist and turns are made based on circumstances but the direction most walk in life is founded on principal. It is what we choose to believe and believe in. It is how our morals and principals dictate to us what twists and turns we make to navigate through life. Almost every person reading this has these three things listed in their top five priorities in life: God, Country, Family. Their position of importance will vary from person to person and who is to say which order is correct? Again, it goes to our morals, principals and beliefs.
Those serving in congress have forgotten what their guiding principals are. Decisions are being made based on the priorities of party leadership than doing what is right based on morals, principals and the constitution. The expected large class of incoming congressional freshman from the 2010 elections will be hard pressed to drop the principals they ran on and adopt the party platform as their guide just as those currently serving have done.
Hopefully with such a large class of freshman, they will be able to walk their own path and not the path of the party. We must keep them from selling the public out in exchange for party support and favor. Keeping our eye on them, holding them accountable and not letting them off the hook for any decision made that goes against God, Country, Constitution and Family must be among our highest priorities. This goes for the old dogs of congress as well. They too must know that the path they choose to walk will seal their fate in all their future elections.
The Last Mile
I can’t recall a sitting president ever knowing that in only a year in office that he was going to be a one term president and a lame duck president during his last 2 years in office. I do believe that President Obama and the democrat leadership in congress have already figured it out.
Obama came strolling into office riding one of the highest waves in modern political history. He had to have had the impression that he was going to be in office for 8 years and with ease, he would be able to walk any piece of legislation through congress without so much as a minor hiccup. In less than 11 months in office, and with the Christmas Eve passage of healthcare reform, reality set in and he realized that his 2 year in office would be his last mile he would walk as president without barriers, insurmountable obstructions and congressional leadership clearing a path for him.
In 16 months he has gone from a job satisfaction rating of high 60’s to low 40’s. He repeatedly has forsaken the will of the people with almost every piece of legislation passed and executive order signed. He has made the phrase “The Chicago Way” a common household term in ways Sean Connery could never do in the movie “Untouchables”.
Now that he and his cabinet know they are on their last mile of having direct influence in congress, they have resorted to the tactic of overloading the system. Think of all the things congress (with the backing of the White House) is demanding to be finished before the New Year: Immigration Reform, Financial Reform, Cap & Trade (American Power Act), Stimulus III, Weapons Reduction Treaty, Net Neutrality Act, etc…….
Now add in the effects from the BP oil spill, lowering popularity, losing special elections (something the democrats never experienced during Bush’s last two years in office), global finance crisis and his own increasing burdens on the U.S. economy, the Sestak scandal, Americans increasingly becoming more knowledgeable to the political ways and now holding Obama accountable and not allowing him to pass the buck off on the Bush administration. He has resorted to stepping up his personal attacks on those who do not agree and support him. Many times he is doing the attacking himself instead of going through minions like he was last year.
It has been amusing these past couple of months watching Obama squirm a little more with each passing week. It’s comical watching Pelosi and Reid resort to telling more far reaching and improbable lies to the American people to try to push their radical socialist, nanny state policies.
Adolf Hitler once said, “Tell a lie, make it a big lie, repeat if often and people will believe it”. Obama and the democratic leadership tried this and now it is coming back to haunt them for the American people are no longer believing them, believing in them and have quit buying the hype they have been selling the public.
Censorship of Facebook, what's next?
It seems all that is needed to be investigated now by the FBI, is for someone to see another’s posts as offensive. William Hodges has long been a critic of the Obama Administration, but recently while posting a news article, his facebook account was deactivated, and merely 12 hours later an FBI agents and Secret Service Agents interviewed him and all his friends on facebook.
It seems that his posts were offensive to another member, obviously someone whom didn’t share his views. Is this what our country has become? Has the social networking venues such as Facebook, and My Space now become targets of the Obama Administration? It seems that not only did Mr. Hodges get investigated for his posts, but the FBI found that he had donated to Israeli cause, and they viewed that as donating to a questionable cause!
Since when has defending Israel (one of our best allies) become a questionable cause? Obviously the present administration sees Israel differently than all the past administrations. Have we become so politically correct in our actions that ANY comment offends us? I think the bigger question would be is has all dissent been outlawed by this administration, or does it just appear this way?
Actual posts by William Hodges after his account was restored by Facebook:
Facebook has unlocked my account. I was interviewed by the FBI and Secret Service for a week. Apparently, the First Amendment only applies when expressing the intellectual position of those in power. Also, be cautious of the charities you contribute to. If you donate to Israeli causes, you may be considered a "domestic terrorist" by the Obama Administration.
John & Roxanna, sincerely. I made critical statements regarding the Obama Administration. Someone reported me.
Lisa, remember the last evening I was online? I was in the middle of posting news articles when I was booted off of Facebook. In less than twelve hours, the FBI and Secret Service was knocking on my door. It was surreal.