Jekyll Island

I ran into an old friend yesterday who is very well read regarding history and politics. We were discussing current political events and he said, in reference to a point he was making, “You’ve heard of The Creature from Jekyll Island” right? “No.´ I responded. “What’s it about?”

I’ll stop the conversation there and not go much further other than to say it’s a book. A book that has been turned into a documentary; a documentary about 70 mins. long ( http://is.gd/1GMmm ).

I’ve not watched it yet, but I will. So I don’t know a lot more about Jekyll island right now than you. I’m not a conspiracy guy, but I think this kind of history is incredibly interesting. Anyway, the creature, as I understand it, is the Federal Reserve. You may want to learn more or... this stuff may bore you to tears. I’m just tossing it out there. I’ve asked two or three other persons I consider to be “up to speed”, if they’d ever heard of Jekyll Island and they had not.

It’s an island off the coast of Georgia. The background about its development is interesting. If you’re interested you may explore for yourself (http://is.gd/1GMoL) . Below is a blurb written circa 1925 that’s very intriguing.


Forbes magazine founder Bertie Charles Forbes wrote several years later:

Picture a party of the nation’s greatest bankers stealing out of New York on a private railroad car under cover of darkness, stealthily riding hundreds of miles South, embarking on a mysterious launch, sneaking onto an island deserted by all but a few servants, living there a full week under such rigid secrecy that the names of not one of them was once mentioned, lest the servants learn the identity and disclose to the world this strangest, most secret expedition in the history of American finance. I am not romancing; I am giving to the world, for the first time, the real story of how the famous Aldrich currency report, the foundation of our new currency system, was written... The utmost secrecy was enjoined upon all. The public must not glean a hint of what was to be done. Senator Aldrich notified each one to go quietly into a private car of which the railroad had received orders to draw up on an unfrequented platform. Off the party set. New York’s ubiquitous reporters had been foiled... Nelson (Aldrich) had confided to Henry, Frank, Paul and Piatt that he was to keep them locked up at Jekyll Island, out of the rest of the world, until they had evolved and compiled a scientific currency system for the United States, the real birth of the present Federal Reserve System, the plan done on Jekyll Island in the conference with Paul, Frank and Henry... Warburg is the link that binds the Aldrich system and the present system together. He more than any one man has made the system possible as a working reality.[5]

Interesting, eh?

Real Freedom

I received a response to an email I'd sent to a friend. It prompted him to express how freedom was his number 1 priority. I thought I post my response.

Hi Kirk,

I too am obsessed with freedom. An interesting thing about freedom, however, is that freedom cannot be truly realized absent discipline. As example: Many years ago one of my daughters wanted to learn to play the piano. Great! I said. Piano lessons it is. We started the piano lessons and, to help here as best I could, I would be available at practice time.

One day at practice, after the 4th of 5th lesson, I was sitting on the bench with her attempting to talk her through a simple piece, which at that stage can be very frustrating, when I noticed big tears starting to roll down her cheeks. I asked, “Honey what’s wrong?” She said, in a weak tear filled voice, “I don’t want to do all this practicing. I just want to play the piano.

I thought for a moment and said “Ok. You don’t have to practice. Go ahead. You’re free to just play the piano." Crying a bit harder she said “But I can’t”. That’s when I “really got” the link between discipline and freedom. My daughter was free to play the piano, but to what purpose without first exercising her freedom by disciplining herself to practice.

Freedom without disciple is a fanciful illusion. The freedom of anarchy is freedom without discipline. You can raise a lot of hell. You can break up things. You can lay about all day and smoke pot, but without discipline, freedom creates nothing

One Word Message

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford... resign!

Dick Morris' Analytic Ability... Remarkable!

Dick Morris' new book, “Catastrophe”, shot to #1 on the NY Times best seller list after one week. While released just a few weeks past, the manuscript was completed months ago during the nascent stages of the Obama administration. Some of his predictions at that time were:

Prediction: The stimulus program will do nothing to help the economy.

Outcome: Unemployment remains high and rising. Even the pro-Obama New York Times recently reported that the stimulus is a dud, and Democrats are talking about a second stimulus!

Prediction: Mortgage rates will rise because of massive federal borrowing to pay for the stimulus.

Outcome: Mortgage rates have increased by 100 basis points or 1 percentage point in the past two months. New mortgage applications have crashed, and housing, which seemed to be bottoming out, is falling deeper into the well.

Prediction: Nobody will be eligible for help under President Obama's mortgage relief plan.

Outcome: In April, there were 420,000 foreclosures and just 11,000 residences that took advantage of the relief plan. Now Obama has expanded eligibility to cover those whose mortgages exceed the value of their homes by 125 percent as opposed to the 105 percent originally set.

Prediction: Few will participate in Obama's Toxic Assets purchase program out of fear that, if the investors do well, the government will tax and hound them.

Outcome: The Wall Street Journal reported just over a week ago that very few investors are participating and the program is a failure.

One of the nation's top political strategists and a Fox News analyst, Dick Morris argues in "Catastrophe" that Obama has put the United States into a free fall, transforming the nation into a socialist state while engaging in a program of appeasement abroad that will invite disastrous terrorist attacks in the future.

Information courtesy of newsmax.com

13 California Property Owner's Lucky Number

Their coming out in full force. Who's they? The public employees unions. These fighters for public employees see the private sector as their slaves. After playing a major role in driving California to bankruptcy they could not care less. Easy to solve their problem... just raise taxes. If you want to know where the Obama administration is taking America, take a look at California. It's said that California is the trend setter for the rest of the country... well?

This from the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association:

"Supporters of increased state spending have spent 31 years trying to make Proposition 13 the boogeyman," writes Joel Fox, former president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, in a Los Angeles Times commentary. "The measure has been held responsible for a freeway collapse during an earthquake and even for O.J. Simpson's not-guilty verdict in the 1995 criminal trial. But for a great majority of Californians, the bogeyman label doesn't stick.

That's because the label is flat-out wrong. And if California's spending class had actually heeded the message voters sent when they passed Proposition 13 more than 30 years ago, the buffoons in Sacramento wouldn't find themselves today scrambling to shore up this house of cards."

By the way, how's that hope and change workin' out for ya?

About this Blog

The ideas I express here are much more often than not, the ideas of others. I do a considerable amount of selected non-fictional reading. As a result, I come across what I consider to be profound ideas and observations. I then pass them along to readers of this blog and encourage them/you to get the book from which the quote came. When reading a book, I have a highlighter at hand so latter, I may glance through the book and quickly review what I thought were salient points.

The school system has become a process for spinning history in what I consider to be a progressive world view. I use the term progressive in the political sense which, by my measure, is not politically healthy for freedom and/or liberty. In fact, the term as used is Orwellianesque which is to make a thing or activity attractive by calling it the opposite of what it is.

For this reason, it is vital for you to not rely on the standard reading fare offered up in public schools or in most colleges and universities. In my profile, under “Favorite Books”, I have recommended four which, if read, will greatly benefit your understanding of how we arrived at where we are and where, absent a profound understanding of that, where we are going.


Quoting from “Civilization and its Enemies”:

“In a world where others are willing to risk death to get their way, you must be willing to risk death to keep them from getting their way. Equally, if you live in a world where nations are willing to risk total war over minor issues, then you to must be willing to risk total war over minor issues – such as parading into the Rhineland. On the other hand, in a world where everyone else is accustomed to making rational economic choices, the one who is prepared to fight to the death will normally be appeased. The same logic applies to whole societies.

The result is an unsettling paradox: the more the spirit of commerce triumphs, the closer mankind comes to dispensing with war, the nearer we approach the end of history, the greater are the rewards to those who decide to return to the path of war, and the easier it will be for them to conquer. There is nothing that can be done to change this fact; it is built into the structure of the world.”

The Myth of the Robber Barons

I just finished reading, for the second time, "The Myth of the Robber Barons", written by Burton W. Folsom Jr. Though only 134 pages plus notes, it's packed with information that gives voice to some truths about the rise of American business.

These are not just interesting anecdotes. This is hard hitting analysis of many of the business titans that operated in the power years of the development of the United States. You'll get a very different perspective from what you were taught in high school and college. It will make sense of what is going on in America today.

The media and the academic community, along with government, have long demonized big business and capitalism, making big business the villain and government the hero when the opposite is in fact the case. Do yourself a favor. Read this book

Big Difference!

I heard a talk show host, after ending a call; make a snide reference regarding the caller’s use of the word "unalienable" when talking about constitutional rights. He said something to the effect of the correct word being "inalienable". I sent him the following email.

This should explain why the founding fathers used unalienable as opposed to inalienable.

Inalienable rights: Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights. Morrison v. State, Mo. App., 252 S.W.2d 97, 101.

Unalienable rights: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred." Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523:

He responded by apologizing and said he would try to do better in the future.

Better Pay Attention... NOW!

This from the Sacramento Bee, Wednesday, July 8, 2009

Public worker unions seeking more clout

The state's ongoing budget crisis provides ample evidence that public employee unions wield immense – even hegemonic – influence over the Capitol's Democratic majority.

Every move on the budget affects those drawing public paychecks, and Democrats won't make any move without at least consulting the affected unions. Not only are Democrats highly dependent on the unions for campaign contributions, but an astonishing number of Democratic lawmakers come directly from their ranks.

For the rest of the article (Which I recommend):
http://www.sacbee.com/capitolandcalifornia/story/2008291.html

I wondered when this conflict of interest would surface. I’ve written to a few broadcasters about it but they’ve shown no interest. There are many voters in the citizen population who are of the government class. They are predominately supportive of taxes, and why wouldn’t they be? It is the source of their income and pensions. (Did you ever think about that?)

Most citizens of the government class will vote against the voter from the private sector. So when you hear complaints about the unreasonableness of the 2/3 requirement to pass a bill, be aware that the great majority of the voicing of those complaints comes from members of the ubiquitous SEIU or the Service Employees International Union who represent them.

The private sector needs that 2/3rds factor to protect itself from various public union members such as, prison guards, teachers, fire, police, and nurses. And don’t forget all their voting family members. That is a sizeable voting block. They are the ones who, in the main, defeated the reforms Arnold Schwarzenegger tried to get passed during his first term. Had the private sector not been fooled or asleep, and those ballot measures had passed, California would most likely be far better off today.

No postulate is perfect. I’m speaking in general terms. And, generally speaking, voters of the government class have a conflict of interest when it comes to voting for higher taxes. This would apply also to politicians who are beholden to unions for campaign dollars and votes.

While we all appreciate the service of those public employees, it’s time we got a grip on the situation. As demonstrated, not only by our current situation but the California town of Vallejo, there are limits. Limits which have all ready been exceeded.

Obama Forgives Tax Cheats... If They Have the Right Stuff

From the April 15, 2009 issue of the Chicago Tribune

The Treasury secretary, who oversees the IRS, didn’t pay all his taxes. Neither did five other top nominees for the Obama administration, or their spouses.Now, as Wednesday’s tax deadline looms, some Americans are wondering why they should comply with the arcane requirements of the Internal Revenue Service when top administration officials failed to do the same.

Even some IRS employees are upset at what they see as a double standard.The most criticized example has been Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who admitted not paying $34,000 in payroll and Social Security taxes, saying his failure to pay was an oversight. Five other nominees disclosed similar tax issues, including one as recently as two weeks ago when Kathleen Sebelius, President Obama’s pick for secretary of health and human services, admitted she didn’t pay $7,040.

“Our members are upset and angry,” said Colleen Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, referring to concern bubbling up within the IRS over unusually strict rules that can cost agents their jobs if they make a mistake. In some cases, IRS employees have lost jobs for simply filing a late return or failing to report a few hundred dollars of interest income.

In an interview Tuesday, Kelley said the Geithner case underlines the need for a change of the rules governing IRS employees.“My issue is not that I want Geithner or anyone else punished,” Kelley said. “I want there to be a re-examination of the law that holds IRS employees to a separate standard: one in which a simple mistake can cost them their jobs with no right of appeal.”

Editorial comment: That's a union for you. Especially a government union. They don't "want Geithner or anyone else punished" they just want the same consideration for themselves. They could not care less about the the law or, for that matter, the American public.

Robert Schriebman, a California tax lawyer who has testified before Congress, said his clients are seething over the tough treatment they get from the IRS, while some in the president’s Cabinet apparently were able to duck paying their taxes.“Politically powerful people are less likely to get bothered by the IRS,” Schriebman said. “It is more than a question of fairness. Not only is the IRS looking away from confronting influential people, the IRS is getting a lot tougher and nastier toward the little guy.”IRS employees have reported that taxpayers are occasionally citing the Geithner case when they are asked to pay their tax bills. “It’s making the compliance conversation harder,” Kelley said.

Geithner’s $34,000 in unpaid taxes pales in comparison to the more than $128,000 owed by Tom Daschle, Obama’s first choice to run health and human services. But Geithner’s position overseeing the IRS has made his case particularly galling in the public’s mind.

IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman told reporters Monday that there is no discrimination when it comes to tax enforcement.“The American people are pretty smart,” he said. “They understand that people who are nominated for high office are going to be put under a level of scrutiny. They also understand the tax code is incredibly complex.”

End of article.

How can Commissioner Shulman say that with a straight face? Only if, contrary to what he says, he thinks the American people are pretty dumb. Incredible!

The left... at War on Charity?

The ongoing war waged by the left on the private sector, has gained considerable steam since the election of Barack Obama as President of the United States. It is, of course, aided not by just a Democrat Congress but a Democrat Congress peopled by more Democrats from the far left than ever before.

It is not unusual for a major war to have various battles occurring simultaneously. The war to which I refer is no different in that regard. The battle I will focus on now is that against charity or, using the broader term, philanthropy.

The main engagement of the left’s war you most hear about is, in one way or another, against capitalism. And while most, or at least many, may not agree with that war, they understand it from a polemic point of view. When, however, a battle is said to be waged against charity, many of those same folks will ask “What …how so?”

Putting aside “how” for the moment, the more important question may be why? To the left, it’s all about government vs. the private sector on every front. The left wants government to control all aspects of everyday life. While the efforts to push back the private sector’s charitable programs have been a goal of the left for some time, those efforts over the past nine months have been supported and amplified to an alarming degree by the federal government.

The Obama administration, as you know if you’re at all awake, has been on a bailout spree. At the same time, however, it offered up a change in tax policy that could not in any way be construed as a bail out effort of non profits; in fact, quite the contrary. Why would that be? It is because they want persons that would benefit from charitable donations from the private sector, to look toward government for help.

Also, historically, private charitable groups, when matched against government programs, are far more beneficial to those needing the help. And governments, especially those operating from the left, do not like to be shown up. Especially by the private sector whether they be for, or not for, profit.

There’s much more to this matter of the left warring against private philanthropy. Not wanting to push reader tolerance for reading on the Net, I encourage you to investigate further. There is an excellent article by David Billet in the July/August issue of Commentary.

Note: You may also want to look into the activities of a California based group who call themselves the Greenlining Institute. Its director recently intoned proudly “…most of our money” …comes not from donations but “from lawsuits.”

Socialist or ...

Someone said to me "It's hard to figure if BO is trending toward socialism or fascism. I replied, "That's because most think of socialism as being on the left and fascism as being on the right. They are both on the left; both socialist. Where does Nazi come from? Nazi is derived from the first two syllables of Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. Party members rarely referred to themselves as Nazis and most often as socialists. The actual party name in English is, National Socialist German Workers’ Party, and commonly referred to in English as the Nazi Party. Hitler and Stalin were fighting over the same turf. So it's not surprising to see the BO administration take some things from the fascist handbook and some from the socialist. They're kind of the same thing only different ...but not fundamentally.

As a point of interest, Mussolini, the dictator of Italy, is credited by some with founding the Italian version of fascism. Others credit him with founding fascism. Mussolini's background from youth was in socialism. His father was an avowed socialist. Mussolini morphed socialism into his doctrine of fascism. All of these political isms, regardless what may be other differentiations, have one thing in common; they restrict liberty and freedom through government control.

Who'll Succeed ...Obama or America?

If you think Obama's success is America's success, you don't understand what is going on. The media got its panties in a bunch a while back when Rush Limbaugh said he hoped Obama would fail. Had they listened to the rest of Limbaugh's remarks (which they probably did but ignored for the sake of the story they wanted to spin) they would know, it wasn't America's failure he was hoping for because he was, is, of the opinion that if what Obama's proposals were to succeed, America would, ipso facto, fail. One cancels out the other. Obama succeeds … America fails, America succeeds…Obama fails.

Well, look around you. And you've seen nothing yet. If Obama gets his way with health care and cap and trade (Waxman-Markey) the havoc wrought upon the economy will be profound and tragic. I make a real effort to not be one of the sky is falling crowd, but I can't deny what I see happening and what's just around the corner if the two programs I referenced are passed as law.

Who Said It? Who Cares? Is it Possible?

The following was observed. I've eliminated the speakers name. Evaluate what was said regardless of who said it.

“You have to wonder if Obama is just trying to lay a foundation for not being a hypocrite when he tries to serve beyond 2016. I wouldn't be at all surprised if in the next number of years there is a move on the 22nd Amendment.”

The speaker has a point.

Upon Obama's taking office, Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., introduced legislation in the House to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, which limits presidents to two consecutive terms or 10 years in office. Serrano’s justification for the bill is that, until 1951, nothing prevented a president from serving more than two terms.

Additionally, a grass-roots movement is under way to make Obama's third term possible. A Web site, End22.com, is dedicated to abolishing the 22nd Amendment and is asking supporters for donations to make it happen.

"We are wise enough to choose our own leader and to decide how long that leader will serve," the Web site states, noting there was nothing in the original Constitution of 1787 that barred a third or fourth term for presidents.

"With our current crises, the American People need to take back their right to elect the leader of their choice. The task is too large and the risk is too great. We must act now!"

Obama wouldn't be so bold as to spearhead this himself. It would be left to shadow players and rank and file supporters.

What's It Mean?

More and more, a new word is being seen. It's a very useful word. You’ll find it used considerably in the bestselling book, Liberty & Tyranny by Mark Levine, an attorney out of New York. The word is …statist. It means:

One who subscribes to the practice or doctrine of giving a centralized government control over economic planning and policy.

A quote from L&T: "The media sing like a nay-saying Greek chorus, amplifying the mantra for greater statist authority. No matter how robust the economy, they claim the imminent threat of recession or depression. And when economic hardship is manifested, often at the hand of the statist, they join the statist in condemning the free market and advocating for more government.”

Two Links (Not Sausage)

Each program is about 6 minutes in length. Very well produce and worth your time. What's the theme? Thomas Paine revisited.

http://is.gd/1kImd

http://is.gd/1kIri