Archive for February, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 99, February 22, 2013: Segment 2: Amity Shlaes–Coolidge–Videos

Posted on February 22, 2013. Filed under: American History, Books, Budgetary Policy, Business, Communications, Consitutional Law, Economics, Employment, Fiscal Policy, Government, Government Spending, History, Housing, Investments, Labor Economics, Law, Media, Monetary Policy, Philosophy, Politics, Radio, Regulation, Tax Policy, Videos, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 99: February 22, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 98: February 15, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 97: February 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 96: February 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 95: January 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 94: December 7, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-99

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 2: Amity Shlaes–Coolidge–Videos

coolidge_calvin

amity_shlaes_calvin_coolidge

President Coolidge, 1st Presidential Film (1924)

President Coolidge’s Inauguration (1925)

Calvin Coolidge: The Best President You’ve Never Heard Of – Amity Shlaes

Amity Shlaes, Author, “Coolidge”

Digital Age-Why is Coolidge the Forgotten President?-Amity Shlaes

“How They Did It” – Part 1 of 4

“How They Did It” – Part 2 of 4

“How They Did It” – Part 3 of 4

“How They Did It” – Part 4 of 4

Background Articles and Videos

Keep Cool With Coolidge, Not Obama: Obama Reveals His True Hatred of Business

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Calvin Coolidge–Videos

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 99, February 22, 2012: Segment 0: Sequestration Fear Mongering and Blame Game–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 99, February 22, 2013: Segment 1: Santa Obama’s $9 minimum wage: good propaganda, bad economics–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 99, February 22, 2013: Segment 1: Santa Obama’s $9 minimum wage: good propaganda, bad economics

Posted on February 22, 2013. Filed under: American History, Business, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Fiscal Policy, Government, Government Spending, History, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Investments, Media, Philosophy, Politics, Private Sector Unions, Public Sector Unions, Radio, Success, Unions, Videos, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 99: February 22, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 98: February 15, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 97: February 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 96: February 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 95: January 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 94: December 7, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-99

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 1: Santa Obama’s $9 minimum wage: good propaganda, bad economics

Santa Obama’s $9 minimum wage: good propaganda, bad economics

By Raymond Thomas Pronk

Presidential economic policies like the proverbial “road to hell” are often paved with good intentions.

In his 2013 State of the Union address, President Barack Obama said:

“Even with the tax relief we’ve put in place, a family with two kids that earns the minimum wage still lives below the poverty line. That’s wrong. Tonight, let’s declare that in the wealthiest nation on Earth, no one who works full time should have to live in poverty and raise the federal minimum wage to $9 an hour. This single step would raise the incomes of millions of working families. It could mean the difference between groceries or the food bank; rent or eviction; scraping by or finally getting ahead. For businesses across the country, it would mean customers with more money in their pockets.”

Why not increase the minimum wage to $18 per hour and win America’s war on poverty?

What are the economic consequences or impact of a $9 minimum wage on young high school and college students seeking employment? A decidedly negative impact if economic history is any guide.

The large increase in teenage unemployment is partly driven by the increase in the minimum wage. When the minimum wage rate was increased in July 2008 from $5.85 to $6.55 there was an upward spike in the teenage unemployment rate to greater than 20 percent. When the minimum wage was again increased in July 2009 from $6.55 to its current rate of $7.25, there was another upward spike in the teenage unemployment rate to greater than 25 percent. This rising trend of upward spikes in teenage unemployment rates after an increase in the minimum wage is reflected in the following chart.

Unemployment rate or percent of 16-19 years from 1948 to present

unemployment_rate_1948_present_16_19-years_edited

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor

David Neumark, professor of economics at the University of California, Irvine and William L. Wascher, deputy director in the Division of Research and Statistics at the Federal Reserve Board, in their book, “Minimum Wages,” provide a comprehensive review of the evidence on the economic effects of minimum wage laws. They concluded that such laws reduce employment opportunities for less-skilled workers, tend to reduce their earnings and are not very effective in reducing poverty.

If Congress passes an increase in the minimum wage to $9 as proposed by Obama, young, inexperienced, low-skill workers, especially blacks and Hispanics, will again be hurt for they will not be hired by businesses who cannot afford to pay them the higher mandated minimum wage. This will be reflected in yet another spike upward in the teenage unemployment rate that might exceed 30 percent.

Furthermore, young American citizens, especially blacks and Hispanics, will face stiff competition from the more than 11 million illegal aliens who predominantly seek low-skilled jobs. Obama and progressives in both the Democratic and Republican parties want to grant these illegal aliens immediate legal status to work in the U.S.

Obama is repeating the past economic policy mistakes of progressive presidents from both political parties such as Hoover, Roosevelt, Truman, Johnson, Nixon, Carter and the Bushes in mandating higher than free market wage rates. These well-intentioned but massive government interventionist economic policies lead to prolonged depressions and recessions with high unemployment rates, especially for young, inexperienced, low skilled and minority workers.

Thirty years ago the black economist, Walter E. Williams, explored the effects of federal and state government intervention into the economy, including minimum wage laws, in the PBS documentary, Good Intentions, based upon his 1982 book, “The State Against Blacks.” Those favoring a rise in the federal minimum wage would be well advised to view this video together with “Milton Friedman on the Minimum Wage” on YouTube before advocating an increase in the minimum wage.

For young American citizens an entry-level job paying a lower competitive market wage rate is preferable to no job at a higher government mandated minimum wage.

Good intentions are not enough. Results measured in jobs created count.

Raymond Thomas Pronk is host of the Pronk Pops Show on KDUX web radio from 3-5 p.m. Fridays and author of the companion blog http://www.pronkpops.wordpress.com/

Digital Age-Why is Coolidge the Forgotten President?-Amity Shlaes

Sumner’s Explanation of The Forgotten Man – Revised for the 21st Century

Sumner’s Explanation of The Forgotten Man – Revised for the 21st
Century

By Joshua Lyons 9/25/09

As soon as A observes something which seems to him to be wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then propose to get a law passed – with the praise of Y – to remedy the evil and help X.

Their law always proposes to determine what C shall do for X or, in the better case, what A, B and C shall do for X.

As for A and B, who get a law to make themselves do for X what they are willing to do for him, we have nothing to say except that they might better have done it without any law, but C is forced to comply with the new law.

All this is done while Y looks on with glee and proclaims that A and B are so good for helping poor X.

A is the politician
B is the humanitarian, special interest, do-gooder, reformer, social speculator, etc.
C is The Forgotten Man (i.e. you, me, us)
X is the downtrodden, the oppressed, the little guy, the misunderstood, etc.
Y is the Mainstream Media

In other words…
As soon as THE POLITICIAN observes something which seems to him to be wrong, from which THE DOWNTRODDEN is suffering, THE POLITICIAN talks it over with THE HUMANITARIAN, and THE POLITICIAN and THE HUMANITARIAN then propose to get a law passed – with the praise of THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA – to remedy the evil and help THE DOWNTRODDEN.

Their law always proposes to determine what THE FORGOTTEN MAN shall do for THE DOWNTRODDEN or, in the
better case, what THE POLITICIAN, THE HUMANITARIAN and THE FORGOTTEN MAN shall do for THE DOWNTRODDEN.

As for THE POLITICIAN and THE HUMANITARIAN, who get a law to make themselves do for THE DOWNTRODDEN what they are willing to do for him, we have
nothing to say except that they might better have done it without any law, but THE FORGOTTEN MAN is forced to comply with the new law.

All this is done while THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA looks on with glee and proclaims that THE POLITICIAN and THE HUMANITARIAN are so good for helping poor THE DOWNTRODDEN.

The preceding commentary was based on William Graham Sumner’s explanation of The Forgotten Man.

http://forgottenmenblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/sumners-explanation-of-forgotten-man.html

MinimumWage

food-stamps-minimum-wage-graph-1970-2010-no-population

The Truth about the Minimum Wage

Obama: “Raise Minimum Wage to $9 an Hour” – SOTU 2013

Obama’s $9/Hour SOTU Minimum Wage

Milton Friedman on Minimum Wage

Power of the Market – Minimum Wage

Williams with Sowell – Minimum Wage

The Job-Killing Impact of Minimum Wage Laws

“Good Intentions” by Dr. Walter Williams

Dr. Walter Williams’ 1982 PBS documentary “Good Intentions” based on his book, “The State Against Blacks”. The documentary was very controversial at the time it was released and led to many animosities and even threats of murder.

In “Good Intentions”, Dr. Williams examines the failure of the war on poverty and the devastating effect of well meaning government policies on blacks asserting that the state harms people in the U.S. more than it helps them. He shows how government anti-poverty programs have often locked people into poverty making the points that:

– being forced to attend 3rd rate public schools leave students unprepared for working life
– minimum wages prevent young people from obtaining jobs at an early age
– licensing and labor laws have had the effect of restricting entrance of blacks into the skilled trades and unions
– the welfare system creates perverse incentives for the poor to make bad choices they otherwise would not

Dr. Williams presents the following solutions to these problems:

Failing Public Schools – Give parents greater control over their children’s education by setting up a tuition tax credit or voucher system to broaden competition in turn revitalizing both public and non-public schools

Minimum Wages – Remove the minimum wage from youngsters to give more young people the chance to learn the world of work at an early age instead spending their free time idle an possibly falling into the habits of the street

Restrictive Labor Laws, Jobs Programs – Eliminate government roadblocks that prevent new entrepreneurs from starting their own business

Welfare Programs – Enact a compassionate welfare system such as a negative income tax which would remove dependency and dis-incentives for the poor to get themselves out of poverty

Scholars interviewed in the documentary include Donald Eberle, Charles Murray, and George Gilder.

Good Intentions 1 of 3 Introduction and Public Schools with Walter Williams

Good Intentions 2 of 3 Minimum Wage, Licensing, and Labor Laws with Walter

Good Intentions 3 of 3 The Welfare System and Conclusions with Walter Williams

Government Intervention and Individual Freedom | Walter Williams

Obama: “Time to Pass Immigration Reform” – State of the Union 2013

Contrasting Views of the Great Depression | Robert P. Murphy

Why You’ve Never Heard of the Great Depression of 1920 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Uncommon Knowledge: The Great Depression with Amity Shlaes

Calvin Coolidge: The Best President You’ve Never Heard Of – Amity Shlaes

Amity Shlaes, Author, “Coolidge”

Keep Cool With Coolidge, Not Obama: Obama Reveals His True Hatred of Business

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 99, February 22, 2012: Segment 0: Sequestration Fear Mongering and Blame Game–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 99, February 22, 2013: Segment 2: Amity Shlaes–Coolidge–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 99, February 22, 2012: Segment 0: Sequestration Fear Mongering and Blame Game–Videos

Posted on February 22, 2013. Filed under: American History, Budgetary Policy, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Government, Government Spending, History, Labor Economics, Monetary Policy, Tax Policy | Tags: , , |

Pronk Pops Show 99: February 22, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 98: February 15, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 97: February 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 96: February 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 95: January 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 94: December 7, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 93: November 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 92: November 10, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 91: November 5, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-99

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 0: Sequestration Fear Mongering and Blame Game–Videos

how_congress_spends_your_money

http://federalbudget.com/

usgs_chart4p04

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/debt_deficit_history

Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual 2000 – 2012

Includes legal tender notes, gold and silver certificates, etc.

The first fiscal year for the U.S. Government started Jan. 1, 1789. Congress changed the beginning of the fiscal year from Jan. 1 to Jul. 1 in 1842, and finally from Jul. 1 to Oct. 1 in 1977 where it remains today.

To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives.

Date Dollar Amount
09/30/2012 16,066,241,407,385.89
09/30/2011 14,790,340,328,557.15
09/30/2010 13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm

The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It

U.S. Debt Clock

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Budget Control Act Sequestration Would Hit Defense Hardest

budget-control-act-680

2013%20sequester%20impact

verochart

The Truth about Sequestration

Fiscal Cliff: 5 Facts about the Federal Budget (animated) (2012)

Sequestration 101

Sequestration and transfer authority

Rand Paul: Sequester Is A Pittance – 2/19/2013

Rand Paul to Obama on Sequester: Stand Up, Be a Leader and Just Do the Right Thing

Sen Paul Sequester Barely Cuts Any Icing From Cake

Greenspan: Odds of Sequestration Occurring Are Very High

Krauthammer: ‘Republicans Should Do Nothing’ On The Sequester

Next big challenge facing DC: The sequester

US military fighting against ‘sequester’ cuts

What is the March 1 sequester!…

Sessions Criticizes Composition Of Sequester, Says Surging Domestic Spending

Understanding the Sequester with David Sirota

Obama Senior Adviser: Haven’t Talked To Congressional Leaders About The Obama

Bob Woodward: Sequester was Obama’s Solution

Drama Obama Pleas For Delay To Sequestration Cuts

Jay Carney: Yes the Sequester Idea Was Put Forward by the President’s Team

Flashback: Obama promises veto stopgap alternative to sequester cuts

Bob Woodward on ‘The Price of Politics,’ Fiscal Fight

In summer 2011, a partisan Congress sparred with the White House on how to solve the U.S. debt crisis. Judy Woodruff talks to journalist Bob Woodward about his new book, “The Price of Politics,” about how Washington’s politicians couldn’t look past their own political aspirations in order to forge a deal.

Our Lying President – Debate lie on sequestration

White House Already Backpedaling On Obama Sequestration Comments

Bob Woodward talks about his new book ‘The Price of Politics’

Fox & Friends Rips Obama On Sequester: Is It ‘Blackmail’ To Get More Tax Hikes

CBO Director: “We haven’t seen a specific proposal” from Obama on replacing

OBAMA despises his OWN idea: the SEQUESTER

Obama:Congress Putting Thousands Of Jobs At Risk

Markets Will React Big When Reality Sets In

Peter Schiff: Obama recession will be worse than the Obama recovery

John Lennon – Give Peace or Sequester A Chance (Original Video Tape)

John Boehner: The President Is Raging Against a Budget Crisis He Created

Obama invented the ‘sequester’ in the summer of 2011 to avoid facing up to America’s spending problem.

By JOHN BOEHNER

A week from now, a dramatic new federal policy is set to go into effect that threatens U.S. national security, thousands of jobs and more. In a bit of irony, President Obama stood Tuesday with first responders who could lose their jobs if the policy goes into effect. Most Americans are just hearing about this Washington creation for the first time: the sequester. What they might not realize from Mr. Obama’s statements is that it is a product of the president’s own failed leadership.

The sequester is a wave of deep spending cuts scheduled to hit on March 1. Unless Congress acts, $85 billion in across-the-board cuts will occur this year, with another $1.1 trillion coming over the next decade. There is nothing wrong with cutting spending that much—we should be cutting even more—but the sequester is an ugly and dangerous way to do it.

By law, the sequester focuses on the narrow portion of the budget that funds the operating accounts for federal agencies and departments, including the Department of Defense. Exempt is most entitlement spending—the large portion of the budget that is driving the nation’s looming debt crisis. Should the sequester take effect, America’s military budget would be slashed nearly half a trillion dollars over the next 10 years. Border security, law enforcement, aviation safety and many other programs would all have diminished resources.

How did the country find itself in this mess?

During the summer of 2011, as Washington worked toward a plan to reduce the deficit to allow for an increase in the federal debt limit, President Obama and I very nearly came to a historic agreement. Unfortunately our deal fell apart at the last minute when the president demanded an extra $400 billion in new tax revenue—50% more than we had shaken hands on just days before.

It was a disappointing decision by the president, but with just days until a breach of the debt limit, a solution was still required—and fast. I immediately got together with Senate leaders Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell to forge a bipartisan congressional plan. It would be called the Budget Control Act.

The plan called for immediate caps on discretionary spending (to save $917 billion) and the creation of a special House-Senate “super committee” to find an additional $1.2 trillion in savings. The deal also included a simple but powerful mechanism to ensure that the committee met its deficit-reduction target: If it didn’t, the debt limit would not be increased again in a few months.

But President Obama was determined not to face another debt-limit increase before his re-election campaign. Having just blown up one deal, the president scuttled this bipartisan, bicameral agreement. His solution? A sequester.

With the debt limit set to be hit in a matter of hours, Republicans and Democrats in Congress reluctantly accepted the president’s demand for the sequester, and a revised version of the Budget Control Act was passed on a bipartisan basis.

Ultimately, the super committee failed to find an agreement, despite Republicans offering a balanced mix of spending cuts and new revenue through tax reform. As a result, the president’s sequester is now imminent.

Both parties today have a responsibility to find a bipartisan solution to the sequester. Turning it off and erasing its deficit reduction isn’t an option. What Congress should do is replace it with other spending cuts that put America on the path to a balanced budget in 10 years, without threatening national security.

Having first proposed and demanded the sequester, it would make sense that the president lead the effort to replace it. Unfortunately, he has put forth no detailed plan that can pass Congress, and the Senate—controlled by his Democratic allies—hasn’t even voted on a solution, let alone passed one. By contrast, House Republicans have twice passed plans to replace the sequester with common-sense cuts and reforms that protect national security.

The president has repeatedly called for even more tax revenue, but the American people don’t support trading spending cuts for higher taxes. They understand that the tax debate is now closed.

The president got his higher taxes—$600 billion from higher earners, with no spending cuts—at the end of 2012. He also got higher taxes via ObamaCare. Meanwhile, no one should be talking about raising taxes when the government is still paying people to play videogames, giving folks free cellphones, and buying $47,000 cigarette-smoking machines.

Washington must get serious about its spending problem. If it can’t reform America’s safety net and retirement-security programs, they will no longer be there for those who rely on them. Republicans’ willingness to do what is necessary to save these programs is well-known. But after four years, we haven’t seen the same type of courage from the president.

The president’s sequester is the wrong way to reduce the deficit, but it is here to stay until Washington Democrats get serious about cutting spending. The government simply cannot keep delaying the inevitable and spending money it doesn’t have.

So, as the president’s outrage about the sequester grows in coming days, Republicans have a simple response: Mr. President, we agree that your sequester is bad policy. What spending are you willing to cut to replace it?

— Mr. Boehner, a Republican congressman from Ohio, is speaker of the House.

A version of this article appeared February 20, 2013, on page A15 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The President Is Raging Against a Budget Crisis He Created.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323495104578314240032274944.html

2013 United States federal budget

The 2013 United States federal budget is the budget to fund government operations for the fiscal year 2013, which is October 2012–September 2013. The original spending request was issued by President Barack Obama in February 2012.[1] The actual appropriations for fiscal year 2013 must be authorized by the full Congress before the budget can take effect, in accordance with the United States budget process.

The Budget Control Act of 2011 mandates caps on discretionary spending, which under current law will be lowered beginning in January 2013 to remove $1.2 trillion of spending over the following ten years. In addition, several temporary tax cuts are scheduled to expire at the beginning of the 2013 calendar year, including the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts on income, capital gains, and estate tax, which had been extended in a 2010 tax deal, as well as a payroll tax cut that began as a result of the 2010 deal and had been most recently extended in an early 2012 tax deal. The combination of sudden spending cuts and tax increases has led to concerns about significant negative effects on the economy in the wake of the weak recovery from the late 2000s recession.

History

Budget Control Act and the Deficit Reduction Committee

The Budget Control Act of 2011 was passed in August 2011 as a resolution to the debt-ceiling crisis. The fiscal year (FY) 2013 budget is the first to be affected by the second of two rounds of budget cuts specified in the act. (The first round of cuts has already been applied to the ten years beginning in FY2012.) For this second round of cuts, the Budget Control Act had formed the United States Congress Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, sometimes referred to as the “supercommittee”, to identify at least $1.2 trillion in cuts over the ten years beginning with FY2013, and specified automatic across-the-board cuts of the same amount, equally split between security and non-security programs, if no such budget reduction legislation was passed by Congress.[4]

On November 21, 2011, the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction announced that it did not reach a deal on the budget-cutting legislation, raising the possibility that the automatic cuts would be activated if the full Congress could not enact its own deficit reduction legislation by December 23, 2011. The supercommittee’s lack of an agreement was attributed to the refusal of Republicans to consider any tax increases, combined with Democratic insistence on including these revenue increases such as the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, which under current law expire at the end of 2012.[5]

Initial proposals

President Obama’s February 2012 budget message to Congress addressed themes of economic crisis and response, an updated defense strategy, taxation fairness, income equality, fiscal responsibility, and investments in education and research to help the U.S. compete economically. He wrote: “The way to rebuild our economy and strengthen the middle class is to make sure that everyone in America gets a fair shot at success. Instead of lowering our standards and our sights, we need to win a race to the top for good jobs that pay well and offer security for the middle class. To succeed and thrive in the global, high-tech economy, we need America to be a place with the highest-skilled, highest-educated workers; the most advanced transportation and communication networks; and the strongest commitment to research and technology in the world. This Budget makes investments that can help America win this race, create good jobs, and lead in the world economy.”[6]

Key elements of the President’s budget for fiscal year (FY) 2013 included expiration of a variety of tax cuts for couples earning over $250,000 ($200,000 if single), short-term stimulus measures to support job growth, and targeted tax cuts for families and businesses. The budget included 2013 revenues of $2.9 trillion or 17.8% GDP (up from $2.5 trillion or 15.8% GDP in 2012) and spending of $3.8 trillion or 23.3% GDP (similar to the prior year in dollar terms but below the 24.3% GDP in 2012). The projected 2013 deficit was $900 billion (5.5% GDP), down from the 2012 deficit of $1.3 trillion (8.5% GDP).[7]

Over the 2013-2022 period, the budget essentially freezes defense and non-defense discretionary spending in dollar terms, such that these categories shrink relative to a growing economy, from 8.7% GDP to 5.9% GDP. Mandatory spending (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and other safety net programs) remain around 14% GDP. Net interest rises from 1.5% GDP to 3.3% GDP. Revenues rise steadily during the period from 17.8% GDP to 20.1% GDP, averaging 19.2% GDP.[8] Debt held by the public rises from $12.6 trillion to $18.7 trillion, but remains flat around 77% GDP during the period.[9]

On May 16, 2012, the United States Senate voted on a 52-page Republican budget amendment billed as a summary of the nearly 2,000 pages in the Obama administration’s 2013 budget proposal. The amendment was defeated by a unanimous 99–0 vote, which paralleled the House of Representatives having voted a similar rejection in March by a count of 414–0. Those defeats of the Republicans’ amendments marked the second year in a row such summary bills met unanimous opposition.[10] In explaining their votes against, Congressional Democrats disputed whether the Republican summary accurately represented the Obama budget proposal; by contrast, Congressional Republicans claimed that their amendment included ample data taken directly from said budget.[11]

Legislation begins to be passed

On July 31, 2012, a tentative deal was announced to fund the government from October 2012 through March 2013 through a continuing resolution, with spending rates slightly higher than the FY2012 levels. The deal was reached because Republicans were eager to avoid a prolonged dispute that could threaten a government shutdown just before the upcoming 2012 general elections.[12] The bill, the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2013, was passed in the House 329–91,[13] passed in the Senate 62–30,[14] and signed by President Obama on September 28, 2012.[15]

On August 1, 2012, the House and Senate passed competing bills on the extension of the Bush tax cuts. The House bill would extend all the tax cuts for one year, while the Senate version would allow taxes to rise on incomes over $250,000. The passage of the bills was reported as being intended as political cover; progress on tax legislation was not expected until after the November elections.[16]

In late December, the Republican House leadership proposed legislation that would allow tax cuts to rise relative to 2012 levels only for annual income over $1,000,000. The proposal was known as “Plan B”, and was intended to force the Senate and the Obama administration to pass it and delay further negotiations until the following month, when Republicans were expected to use the reaching of the federal debt limit as leverage. However, the House vote on the plan was abruptly cancelled on December 20, 2012 after it became clear that the bill did not have enough support to pass, due to conservative members of the House who would not support any legislation that would raise taxes without also cutting spending.[17]

On December 28, 2012, the Senate passed the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 to provide for $60.4 billion in additional spending to cover recovery costs from Hurricane Sandy, which had hit the northeastern United States in late October. The bill passed the Senate 62–32, but faced uncertain prospects in the House.[18]

At around 2 a.m. on January 1, 2013, the Senate passed a compromise bill, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, by a margin of 89–8. The bill would delay the budget sequestration by two months, and bill includes $600 billion over ten years in new tax revenue relative to extending 2012 levels, which is about one-fifth of the revenue that would have been raised had no legislation been passed. The revenue would come from increased marginal income and capital gains tax rates relative to their 2012 levels for annual income over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples; a phase-out of certain tax deductions and credits for those with incomes over $250,000 for individuals and $300,000 for couples, an increase in estate taxes relative to 2012 levels on estates over $5 million, and expiration of the two-year-old cut to payroll taxes, which is applied to income under the Social Security Wage Base, which was $110,100 in 2012. All these changes would all be made permanent.[19][20] House Speaker John Boehner promised a prompt vote on the Senate bill, but the prospect of the House passing an amended bill raised the prospect that legislation might not be enacted by the end of the 112th Congress at noon on January 3.[21]

Analysis

Implications of the Budget Control Act

Main articles: Budget Control Act of 2011 and United States fiscal cliff

The automatic cuts of $1.2 trillion resulting from the absence of a deal from the supercommittee over ten years would be split equally between security and non-security programs, and include $500 billion in cuts to the Department of Defense. The FY2013 defense budget would be reduced 11%, from $525 billion to $472 billion, after already having been cut from $571 billion in the first installment of cuts in the Budget Control Act. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta initially gave the total cut figure as 23%.[22] The planned cuts include reductions in troop levels, a modest limit in pay raises for soldiers starting in 2015, an increase in health fees for veterans, delays in the construction of new naval ships and in the purchasing of new fighter aircraft such as the F-35, and the possibility of a round of base closings within the United States, but cuts to special operations, cyberwarfare, and intelligence programs were avoided.[23] Initial reports had also suggested that the number of carrier battle groups might be reduced from 11 to 10,[22] although it was later determined that the number of aircraft carriers would not in fact be cut.[24] Some Republicans in Congress advocated reversing the cuts to the military, citing the effect on national security, and Secretary Panetta has opposed the cuts, calling them “devastating” and raising “substantial risk of not being able to meet our defense needs.” President Obama has promised to veto any legislation seeking to avoid the cuts, and House Speaker John Boehner also indicated his commitment to following the cuts in the Budget Control Act.[5][25] According to the Center for American Progress, several Presidents have significantly reduced defense spending after wars, without compromising national security. Defense spending in 2011 remained high by historical standards, adjusted for inflation.[26]

The Budget Control Act also specifies automatic cuts of 7.8% to domestic programs and 2% to Medicare, while Medicaid and Social Security will be unaffected. These entitlement programs were protected from cuts in return for the absence of new revenues in the Budget Control Act.[27]

The automatic cuts to domestic programs would include cuts of up to 11% to science research and development agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, NASA, and the U. S. National Laboratories run by the Department of Energy. It is anticipated that this could cause federal grant acceptance levels to fall into the single digits, a consequence which has been called catastrophic for academic institutions by Michael Lubell of the American Physical Society. The cuts could also endanger politically controversial research such as climate change research programs in NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.[28] Due to the role of scientific research in economic growth and job creation, and given international competition in this field, the cuts have been opposed by professional and academic organizations, and federal support of research and development has been called “an area of U.S. investment too critical to be cut” by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.[29][30]

Ten-year projections

Annual rates of increase in major revenue categories budgeted for the 2012-2022 period were:

  • Individual income taxes: 8.4%
  • Corporation income taxes: 8.2%
  • Social insurance (mainly payroll) taxes: 6.6%
  • Total tax revenues: 7.6%

Annual rates of increase in major spending categories budgeted for the 2012-2022 period were:

  • Defense: 1.8%
  • Non-defense discretionary: 1.6%
  • Social Security: 5.8%
  • Medicare: 6.6%
  • Medicaid: 8.5%
  • Net interest: 14.2%
  • Total spending: 5.0%[31]

Changes in revenues primarily represent a return to the long-run average. Tax revenues historically have averaged around 18% GDP. The subprime mortgage crisis resulted in significant declines in revenues due to high unemployment and reduced economic activity, with revenue falling to a record low 15% GDP. President Obama’s budget preserves the Bush income tax cuts for couples earning below $250,000, while eliminating some tax exemptions and deductions (tax expenditures).[32]

Defense and non-defense discretionary expenses are essentially frozen in real dollar terms for the 2013-2022 period, growing at or below the rate of inflation. Department of Defense spending rose at an annual rate of 8% between 2000 and 2011; this amount includes both the baseline and war spending. Non-defense discretionary spending rose at an annual rate of 6.6% between 2000 and 2011. Mandatory spending is mainly driven by demographic changes (i.e., an aging population, with fewer workers per retiree), healthcare cost increases per capita, and Social Security cost of living adjustments. Interest costs represent a return to more typical interest rates as the economy recovers along with the growing public debt.[32]

Total revenues and spending

The Obama administration’s February 2012 budget request contained $2.902 trillion in receipts and $3.803 trillion in outlays, for a deficit of $901 billion.[33] The budget projects a reduction in the deficit to $575 billion by 2018 before rising to $704 billion by 2022.[34]

Total receipts (in billions of dollars)::

Item Requested[33]
Individual income tax 1,359
Corporate income tax 348
Social Security and other payroll tax 959
Excise tax 88
Customs duties 33
Estate and gift taxes 13
Deposits of earnings and Federal Reserve System 80
Other miscellaneous receipts 21
Total 2902

Total outlays by agency (in billions of dollars):

Agency Discretionary Mandatory Total
Department of Defense including Overseas Contingency Operations 666.2 6.7 672.9
Department of Health and Human Services including Medicare and Medicaid 80.6 860.3 940.9
Department of Education 67.7 4.2 71.9
Department of Veterans Affairs 60.4 79.4 139.7
Department of Housing and Urban Development 41.1 5.2 46.3
Department of State and Other International Programs 56.1 3.4 59.5
Department of Homeland Security 54.9 0.5 55.4
Department of Energy 35.6 –0.6 35.0
Department of Justice 23.9 12.7 36.5
Department of Agriculture 26.8 127.7 154.5
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 17.8 –0.02 17.8
National Intelligence Program 52.6 0 52.6
Department of Transportation 24.0 74.5 98.5
Department of the Treasury 14.1 96.2 110.3
Department of the Interior 12.3 1.2 13.5
Department of Labor 13.2 88.4 101.7
Social Security Administration 11.7 871.0 882.7
Department of Commerce 9.5 –0.5 9.0
Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works 8.2 –0.007 8.2
Environmental Protection Agency 9.2 –0.2 8.9
National Science Foundation 7.4 0.2 7.5
Small Business Administration 1.4 –0.006 1.4
Corporation for National and Community Service 1.1 0.007 1.1
Net interest 246 0 246
Disaster costs 2 0 2
Other spending 34.0- 61.7 29.5
Total 1,510 2,293 3,803

References

  1. ^ Riley, Charles (February 13, 2012). “Obama unveils $3.8 trillion budget”. CNNMoney. Retrieved February 13, 2012.
  2. ^ Hensarling, Jeb (November 22, 2011). “Why the Super Committee Failed”. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved December 9, 2011.
  3. ^ Murray, Patty. “Deficit-reduction chair says she’s not done working for compromise”. Retrieved December 14, 2011.
  4. ^ Lisa Mascaro; Kathleen Hennessey (July 31, 2011). “U.S. leaders strike debt deal to avoid default”. Los Angeles Times.
  5. ^ a b Steinhauer, Jennifer; Cooper, Helene; and Pear, Robert (22 November 2011). “Panel Fails to Reach Deal on Plan for Deficit Reduction”. The New York Times: p. A18. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
  6. ^ President Obama-The Budget Message of the President-February 2012
  7. ^ OMB-President Obama’s 2013 Budget-Summary Tables S5 and S6
  8. ^ OMB-President Obama’s 2013 Budget-Summary Table S-6
  9. ^ OMB-President Obama’s 2013 Budget-Summary Table S15
  10. ^ Dinan, Stephen (16 May 2012). “Obama budget defeated 99-0 in Senate”. Washington Times. Retrieved 16 May 2012.
  11. ^ http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/house-and-senate-unanimously-reject-obama-budgets-or-do-they/
  12. ^ Steinhauer, Jennifer (1 August 2012). “Leaders Reach Tentative Deal on Spending to Avoid Fight Before Election Day”. The New York Times: p. A11. Retrieved 1 August 2012.
  13. ^ Weisman, Jonathan (14 September 2012). “House Republicans Welcome Back Ryan, and His Vote, on a Spending Measure”. The New York Times: p. A13. Retrieved 21 September 2012.
  14. ^ “U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 112th Congress – 2nd Session: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 117)”. United States Senate. Retrieved 1 October 2012.
  15. ^ “Status of Appropriations Legislation for Fiscal Year 2013”. Library of Congress. Retrieved 1 October 2012.
  16. ^ Weisman, Jonathan (2 August 2012). “House Approves One-Year Extension of the Bush-Era Tax Cuts”. The New York Times: p. A12. Retrieved 21 September 2012.
  17. ^ Weisman, Jonathat (21 December 2012). “Boehner Cancels Tax Vote in Face of G.O.P. Revolt”. The New York Times: p. A1. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
  18. ^ Hernandez, Raymond (29 December 2012). “Senate Passes $60.4 Billion for Storm Aid; Bill’s Fate in House Is Unclear”. The New York Times: p. A15. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
  19. ^ Weisman, Jonathan (1 January 2013). “Senate Passes Legislation to Allow Taxes on Affluent to Rise”. The New York Times. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
  20. ^ Hook, Janet; Hughes, Siobhan (1 January 2013). “Fiscal-Cliff Focus Moves to House”. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
  21. ^ Steinhauer, Jennifer; Weisman, Jonathan (1 January 2013). “G.O.P. Anger Over Tax Deal Endangers Final Passage”. The New York Times. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
  22. ^ a b Bumiller, Elisabeth (23 November 2011). “Despite Threat of Cuts, Pentagon Officials Made No Contingency Plans”. The New York Times: p. A20. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
  23. ^ Bumiller, Elisabeth; Shanker, Thom (27 January 2012). “Defense Budget Cuts Would Limit Raises and Close Bases”. The New York Times: p. A12. Retrieved 3 February 2012.
  24. ^ Stewart, Phil (21 January 2012). “U.S. won’t cut carrier fleet to fix budget, Panetta says”. Reuters. Retrieved 3 February 2012.
  25. ^ Steinhauer, Jennifer (23 November 2011). “Automatic Military Cuts May Stand in Congress”. The New York Times: p. A20. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
  26. ^ Center on American Progress-A Historical Perspective on Defense Spending-July 2011
  27. ^ Bendavid, Naftali (21 November 2011). “Congress’s Deficit ‘Bomb’: Scary or Not?”. Washington Wire. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
  28. ^ Hand, E. (2011). “Debt deal sets day of reckoning”. Nature 476 (7359): 133–134. doi:10.1038/476133a. PMID 21833060. edit
  29. ^ Ham, Becky (25 November 2011). “Science, Engineering Groups Urge Lawmakers to Protect R&D”. Science 334 (6059): 1079. doi:10.1126/science.334.6059.1079.
  30. ^ “Open Letter to the United States Congress Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction”. Stand With Science. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
  31. ^ OMB-President Obama’s 2013 Budget-Summary Table S4 and S5
  32. ^ a b CBO-Long Term Economic Outlook-January 2012
  33. ^ a b “Fiscal Year 2013 Budget of the U.S. Government”. United States Office of Management and Budget. Retrieved 13 February 2012.
  34. ^ Weisman, Jonathan (2012-02-10). “Obama Budget Bets Other Concerns Will Trump the Deficit”. New York Times. Retrieved 2012-04-22.

Further reading

External links

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_United_States_federal_budget

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 99, February 22, 2013: Segment 1: Santa Obama’s $9 minimum wage: good propaganda, bad economics–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 99, February 22, 2013: Segment 2: Amity Shlaes–Coolidge–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 98, February 15, 2013: Segment 2: Obama’s Kill List–Drones–Remotely Piloted Aircraft–RPAs–Killing Machines–We Don’t Torture Terrorists–We Kill Targeted Americans, Civilians and Children in Undeclared Wars–Obama is Judge, Jury, and Executioner–Hope, Change, and Murder, Inc.–The Mass Murderer In The White House–DOJ White Paper on Drone Memo–Videos

Posted on February 15, 2013. Filed under: American History, Business, Communications, Consitutional Law, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, Government, Government Spending, History, Law, Philosophy, Politics, Polls, Videos, Violence, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 98: February 15, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 97: February 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 96: February 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 95: January 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 94: December 7, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 93: November 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 92: November 10, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 91: November 5, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 2: Obama’s Kill List–Drones–Remotely Piloted Aircraft–RPAs–Killing Machines–We Don’t Torture Terrorists–We Kill Americans, Civilians and Children in Undeclared Wars–Obama is Judge, Jury, and Executioner–Hope, Change, and Murder, Inc.–The Mass Murderer In The White House–Videos

01302013-obama-drone-strikes

reaper_drone

Somalia-drones-Obama

obama-kill-list

domestic-drone-cartoon

obama_kill_list

Drone-Disapproval

why-do-they-hate-us

Spies in the sky

Rand Paul Says He’ll Block Nominations Until Answered If Drone Assassinations

Guidelines for killing US citizens stir outrage

Memo Leaked: Barrack Obama can Kill American Citizens without Evidence

Govt. Has The Right to Kill American Citizens?

[yuotube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjqZJveJb2Q]

McLaughlin Group Panel Investigates: Will Obama Face War Crimes Prosecution

Drone Spin: Killing machine PR swarms US mainstream

Obama’s Kill List Sanctioned by Dept. of Justice

No civilians killed by Obama’s drone attacks: so explain this 

Fox Liberal Contributor Kirsten Powers Rips Obama And Other Liberals For Supporting

Drone Strikes Kill 175 Kids in Pakistan Alone, Admits Obama.

Are Drone Strikes and Kill Lists The New Normal? Q&A w Newsweek’s Eli Lake

Obama is worse than George Bush and Tony Blair says Noam Chomsky 

Obama’s Kill List, Drones, & Assassinating U.S. Citizens

Deadly Drone Strikes – Obama is ‘Serious’

Obama Drone Strikes Are ‘Mass Murder’ – Jeremy Scahill

Drone Strikes Kill Numerous Civilians – Report

“Thousands Of Innocent People Have Been Killed Under These Drone Attacks!”

Obama’s secret drone war explained by Reuters’ David Rohde – Fast Forward

BREAKING! OBAMA DECLARES DRONE WAR ON ALL…

Judge Napolitano on Obama’s Drone Strike Policy: ‘This Is the Power Claimed

Maddow Examines AG Holder’s Response To Questions About Drone Memos

Gerald Celente on Farrakhan “Murderer in The White House” comment “Call These People What They Are”

Drone Spin: Killing machine PR swarms US mainstream

80% of drone strike victims innocent civilians

Obama Orders Children Murdered with Predator Drones. WARNING: Graphic video

US Predator Drone strikes kill 80 innocent civilians in Yemen

 

Judge Napolitano on Government Killing Americans

Who Said You Can Kill Americans Mister President?

Obama’s kill list revealed

Obama’s Secret Kill List

Is Obama a Mass Killer of Innocent Children?

Obama: Nobel Peace Prize winner with a kill list

DOJ Drone Memo: If Bush Attempted This Policy, Democrats Would’ve Called

DOJ White Paper on Drone Memo

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf

John Brennan: The Nexus of Torture and Drone Assassinations

America’s War Drones Kill Over 800 Civilians – 200 Children – Casualties Of War

Obama Kill List Exposed: Leaked Drone Memo; Assassination of U.S. Citizens

Drone Strike Kills 4 In Pakistan

Attack of the Drones – USA

Rise of the Machines – USA

Pentagon drones flying domestic; declaring war on your privacy?

Congress launches ‘Attack of the drones’

By Michael Isikoff National Investigative Correspondent, NBC News

A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” — even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.

The 16-page memo, a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s most secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects abroad, including those aimed at American citizens, such as the September 2011 strike in Yemen that killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes.

The secrecy surrounding such strikes is fast emerging as a central issue in this week’s hearing of White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, a key architect of the drone campaign, to be CIA director. Brennan was the first administration official to publicly acknowledge drone strikes in a speech last year, calling them “consistent with the inherent right of self-defense.” In a separate talk at the Northwestern University Law School in March, Attorney General Eric Holder specifically endorsed the constitutionality of targeted killings of Americans, saying they could be justified if government officials determine the target poses “an imminent threat of violent attack.”


But the confidential Justice Department “white paper” introduces a more expansive definition of self-defense or imminent attack than described by Brennan or Holder in their public speeches. It refers, for example, to what it calls a “broader concept of imminence” than actual intelligence about any ongoing plot against the U.S. homeland.

Michael Isikoff, national investigative correspondent for NBC News, talks with Rachel Maddow about a newly obtained, confidential Department of Justice white paper that hints at the details of a secret White House memo that explains the legal justifications for targeted drone strikes that kill Americans without trial in the name of national security.

“The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” the memo states.

Read the entire ‘white paper’ on drone strikes on Americans

Instead, it says, an “informed, high-level” official of the U.S. government may determine that the targeted American has been “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of a violent attack and “there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities.” The memo does not define “recently” or “activities.”

As in Holder’s speech, the confidential memo lays out a three-part test that would make targeted killings of American lawful: In addition to the suspect being an imminent threat, capture of the target must be “infeasible, and the strike must be conducted according to “law of war principles.” But the memo elaborates on some of these factors in ways that go beyond what the attorney general said publicly. For example, it states that U.S. officials may consider whether an attempted capture of a suspect would pose an “undue risk” to U.S. personnel involved in such an operation. If so, U.S. officials could determine that the capture operation of the targeted American would not be feasible, making it lawful for the U.S. government to order a killing instead, the memo concludes.

The undated memo is entitled “Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U.S. Citizen who is a Senior Operational Leader of Al Qa’ida or An Associated Force.” It was provided to members of the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees in June by administration officials on the condition that it be kept confidential and not discussed publicly.

Although not an official legal memo, the white paper was represented by administration officials as a policy document that closely mirrors the arguments of classified memos on targeted killings by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, which provides authoritative legal advice to the president and all executive branch agencies. The administration has refused to turn over to Congress or release those memos publicly — or even publicly confirm their existence. A source with access to the white paper, which is not classified, provided a copy to NBC News.

“This is a chilling document,” said Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the ACLU, which is suing to obtain administration memos about the targeted killing of Americans. “Basically, it argues that the government has the right to carry out the extrajudicial killing of an American citizen. … It recognizes some limits on the authority it sets out, but the limits are elastic and vaguely defined, and it’s easy to see how they could be manipulated.”

In particular, Jaffer said, the memo “redefines the word imminence in a way that deprives the word of its ordinary meaning.”

A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment on the white paper. The spokeswoman, Tracy Schmaler, instead pointed to public speeches by what she called a “parade” of administration officials, including Brennan, Holder, former State Department Legal Adviser Harold Koh and former Defense Department General Counsel Jeh Johnson that she said outlined the “legal framework” for such operations.

Pressure for turning over the Justice Department memos on targeted killings of Americans appears to be building on Capitol Hill amid signs that Brennan will be grilled on the subject at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday.

On Monday, a bipartisan group of 11 senators — led by Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon — wrote a letter to President Barack Obama asking him to release all Justice Department memos on the subject. While accepting that “there will clearly be circumstances in which the president has the authority to use lethal force” against Americans who take up arms against the country, it said, “It is vitally important … for Congress and the American public to have a full understanding of how the executive branch interprets the limits and boundaries of this authority.”

Anticipating domestic boom, colleges rev up drone piloting programs

The completeness of the administration’s public accounts of its legal arguments was also sharply criticized last month by U.S. Judge Colleen McMahon in response to a lawsuit brought by the New York Times and the ACLU seeking access to the Justice Department memos on drone strikes targeting Americans under the Freedom of Information Act. McMahon, describing herself as being caught in a “veritable Catch-22,” said she was unable to order the release of the documents given “the thicket of laws and precedents that effectively allow the executive branch of our government to proclaim as perfectly lawful certain actions that seem on their face incompatible with our Constitution and laws while keeping the reasons for the conclusion a secret.”

In her ruling, McMahon noted that administration officials “had engaged in public discussion of the legality of targeted killing, even of citizens.” But, she wrote, they have done so “in cryptic and imprecise ways, generally without citing … any statute or court decision that justifies its conclusions.”

In one passage in Holder’s speech at Northwestern in March, he alluded – without spelling out—that there might be circumstances where the president might order attacks against American citizens without specific knowledge of when or where an attack against the U.S. might take place.

“The Constitution does not require the president to delay action until some theoretical end-stage of planning, when the precise time, place and manner of an attack become clear,” he said.

But his speech did not contain the additional language in the white paper suggesting that no active intelligence about a specific attack is needed to justify a targeted strike. Similarly, Holder said in his speech that targeted killings of Americans can be justified if “capture is not feasible.” But he did not include language in the white paper saying that an operation might not be feasible “if it could not be physically effectuated during the relevant window of opportunity or if the relevant country (where the target is located) were to decline to consent to a capture operation.” The speech also made no reference to the risk that might be posed to U.S. forces seeking to capture a target, as was mentioned in the white paper.

The white paper also includes a more extensive discussion of why targeted strikes against Americans does not violate constitutional protections afforded American citizens as well as a U.S. law that criminalizes the killing of U.S. nationals overseas.

It also discusses why such targeted killings would not be a war crime or violate a U.S. executive order banning assassinations.

“A lawful killing in self-defense is not an assassination,” the white paper reads. “In the Department’s view, a lethal operation conducted against a U.S. citizen whose conduct poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States would be a legitimate act of national self-defense that would not violate the assassination ban. Similarly, the use of lethal force, consistent with the laws of war, against an individual who is a legitimate military target would be lawful and would not violate the assassination ban.”

Ask the experts: Drones

By Sydney Sarachan
“…How precise are drone attacks?RC: Pretty precise is my understanding. If you think about it, a drone pilot first sits outside of a structure doing surveillance for a long time. Upon getting the order, he or she delivers the missile from relatively nearby. That is why some experts (for instance, American University’s Kenneth Anderson) argue that drones strikes may be more consistent with limits on collateral damage. It may also explain higher observed rates of PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) in drone pilots. Of course, even manned missile attacks are often preceded by on-the-ground reconnaissance that paints a specific target.CF: This depends upon the kind of drone attack. In Pakistan’s FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) they are all intelligence-led (as opposed to “troops in contact”). On this, please see the other pieces I have written on this: Drone Wars and Drones Over Pakistan – Menace or Best Viable Option?JF: Drones are extremely precise. The debate over their use has been whether they are accurate: whether they target the right people. In terms of precision, they do hit the targets we give them very consistently, we just don’t always know who that target is.RN: Since the answer to this question depends on how many civilians are killed or injured for each targeted “militant” who has been killed, it can’t be answered without answering the question of how many civilian casualties there have been.NW: Although missiles launched from drones may be more precise than some other weapons systems, they are known to have caused the deaths of hundreds of civilian bystanders. The issue is less one of technical precision than it is the standards under which the U.S. government decides who may be targeted and how it protects civilian bystanders from death or injury, as it is required to do under international law. Outside the context of armed conflict, the use of lethal force is illegal unless it is a last resort to avert a concrete, specific, and imminent threat. Further, the government is obligated to take all feasible precautions to protect civilian bystanders from harm. But those aren’t the standards that the government is using. The New York Times has reported that the U.S. “counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.” Regardless of the theoretical precision of drone attacks, when the government uses such flawed reasoning it will inevitably cause civilian bystander deaths, in violation of international law. …”

Background Articles and Videos

16×9:     Watchful eye: Drone warfare

Predator Drones

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 98, February 15, 2013: Segment 0: Dr. Benjamin Carson’s Amazing Speech at the National Prayer Breakfast — Gifted Hands — Who Gives Children A Second Chance –Videos

Pronk Pops Show 98, February 15, 2013: Segment 1: Chris Dorner–New Left’s New Social Justice Hero: Black Veteran Ex-L.A.P.D. Cop Killer — Another Lone Wolf Killer–Go Figure–Depravity Scale–Police Execute Killer By Burning Cabin–Police Were Judge, Jury, and Executioner — Vigilante Justice — Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 98, February 15, 2013: Segment 1: Chris Dorner–New Left’s New Social Justice Hero: Black Veteran Ex-L.A.P.D. Cop Killer — Another Lone Wolf Killer–Go Figure–Depravity Scale–Police Execute Killer By Burning Cabin–Police Were Judge, Jury, and Executioner — Vigilante Justice — Videos

Posted on February 15, 2013. Filed under: American History, Business, Communications, Consitutional Law, Crime, Federal Government, Government, Law, Media, Politics, Polls, Security, Videos, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 98: February 15, 2013 

Pronk Pops Show 97: February 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 96: February 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 95: January 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 94: December 7, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 93: November 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 92: November 10, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 91: November 5, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 1: Chris Dorner–New Left’s New Social Justice Hero: Black Veteran Ex-L.A.P.D. Cop Killer — Another Lone Wolf Killer–Go Figure–Depravity Scale–Police Execute Killer By Burning Cabin–Police Were Judge, Jury, and Executioner — Vigilante Justice — Videos

o-CHRIS-DORNER-CABIN-FIRE-570

dornerjpg

dorner_police

christopher-dorner-drone

Did the Police Execute Chris Dorner?

LATEST NEWS : Is the Dorner manhunt over?

ULTIMATE PROOF_ SWAT Team Purposely Set Fire To Dorner’s Cabin Waco Style Fire

Christopher Dorner Shootout – Cops say “Burn It Down”

Drones Search for Cop Killer & LAPD Apology

Chris Dorner Cabin Shootout Exposed Mainstream Media Misinformation

Liberal Hypocrisy On Display Over Murder Suspect’s Manifesto

“He Had An RPG!” Young Turks Guest Justifies Cops Executing Chris Dorner

CHRIS DORNER ~ Hero or Villain? RT NEWS Scathing Report and Investigation…

Cop Killer Christopher Dorner Gaining Supporters on Facebook

Christopher Dorner – Hero or Villain?

Liberals mourn Christopher Dorner

Depraved CNN Pundits Defend Dorner

Depravity Scale

Understanding Motives of The ‘Lone Wolf’ Shooter/Killer, Mass Murderer’s Deadly A

Psychiatrist analyzes shooters’ mindsets

What creates a MASS SHOOTER

Chris Dorner Triggers An Avalanche Of Support On The Internet Some Hailing Him A Truth Teller

CNN: Chris Dorner Is ‘Like Watching Django [Unchained] Getting Revenge’

On Wednesday, a CNN panel explored the phenomenon of people on social media expressing sympathy and support for Chris Dorner, whose rampage ended yesterday as law enforcement cornered him in a remote cabin in Big Bear, California. Two of CNN’s panel guests said that Dorner’s murder spree exposed the issue of “police brutality.” One contributor said that Dorner’s escapades reminded him of watching “Django Unchained in real life.”
The Daily Beast contributor Lauren Ashburn said she was offended by those who found Dorner’s murderous actions laudable. She said that his attacks on innocent people were a tragedy, and hours of airtime were “wasted” covering the killer’s motivations.

Official Christopher Rambo Dorner Story

Whistle Blower Cop killing Corrupt Cops until they come clean !!!

Christopher Dorner Has LAPD In Fear For Their Lives

Mainstream Media:Why Are You Making A Difference With Christopher Dorner?

Christopher Dorner (Dead?)MANIFESTO. Ex LAPD Officer’s Manifesto

LAPD Chief Announces He’s Reopening The Case That Resulted In Dorner’s Dismissal

Former Police Officer Goes On Killing Spree (Christopher Jordan Dorner)

Chris Dorner, Fugitive Ex-Los Angeles Cop In Shootout Reported Dead, BUT LAPD

Did Police Scanners Reveal Police Plan to Torch Fugitive Chris Dorner’s Hideout?

Police Audio from the Shootout with Christopher Dorner in Big Bend Ca, 2/12/13

2 Innocent People Shot In Torrance In Ex-Cop Manhunt – Christopher Dorner

Police shoot dozens of rounds at innocent women driving similar vehicle to manhunt

Anonymous: Operation Dorner | #OpDroner

Alex Jones Predicted Chris Dorner Torched Waco Style 2 Hours Before Fire

Chris Dorner Torched Waco Style?

Media Complicit in Cover Up of Dorner Execution

Did Police Scanners Reveal Police Plan to Torch Fugitive Chris Dorner’s Hideout?

After a massive weeklong manhunt, police cornered fugitive ex-LAPD cop Christopher Dorner in a cabin near Big Bear Lake.

It has since been learned that Dorner had been hiding in a nearby cabin for the past several days holding a couple captive since police found his burned out truck nearby several days earlier.

Early Tuesday Dorner initially fled in a stolen purple Nissan but crashed that vehicle and fled into the forest only to emerge nearby and carjack local resident, Richard Helterbrake on a nearby rural road. After allowing Helterbrake to retrieve his dog from his vehicle, Dorner then escaped in his white extended cab pickup.

The vehicle was spotted by Forest Service personnel and Dorner is reported to have fled into the forest and taken refuge in a rural cabin in the Big Bear area after a shoot out with two San Bernadino County Sheriff’s Deputies which left both wounded. One deputy, Jeremiah McKay was airlifted in critical condition and was confirmed dead.

Numerous police quickly converged on the area and after a fierce gun battle the cabin was engulfed in flames. A single set of remains was recovered from the cabin on Wednesday but has not yet been confirmed as belonging to Dorner. The charred state of the remains means DNA testing will be required and that is expected to take several days. In the interim, the LAPD has announced that they will continue their protective details on the 40 people named as possible targets in Dorner’s rambling 6,000 word manifesto.

Recordings of the police communications picked up on a police scanner appear to show the police discussing plans to burn the cabin. To hear the recordings click on the accompanying video link.

This latest revelation brings additional scrutiny and criticism on police methods in the wake of Chris Dorner‘s rampage which he argued was necessary to bring to light the corrupt practices of the LAPD and their institutional use of excessive force.

http://www.examiner.com/article/police-scanners-reveal-police-torched-rogue-ex-cop-chris-dorner-s-hideout

What is the Depravity Scale Research?

Judges and juries both across the United States and in other countries who decide that a crime is “depraved,” “heinous,” or “horrible” can assign more severe sentences. Yet there is no standardized definition for such dramatic words that courts already use. And while we may all recognize that some crimes truly separate themselves from others, there is no standard, fair way to distinguish crimes that are the worst of the worst, or “evil.”

To minimize the arbitrariness of how courts determine the worst of crimes, and to eliminate bias in sentencing, the Depravity Scale research aims to establish societal standards of what makes a crime depraved, and to develop a standardized instrument based on specific characteristics of a crime that must be proven in order to merit more severe sentences.

This research will refine into the Depravity Standard, an objective measure based on forensic evidence. This instrument distinguishes not who is depraved but rather, what aspects of a given crime are depraved and the degree of a specific crime’s depravity. The research will enhance fairness in sentencing, given that it is race, gender and socio-economic blind.

The research has already been guided by legal and scientific study. Now, a two-part survey has been developed to involve the general public in establishing societal standards of what makes a crime depraved. The first part enables the general public to shape the specific intents, actions, and attitudes that should be included as items of the Depravity Standard instrument, and the second involves the general public in refining the relative weight of these items. In both surveys, all members of the general public are urged to participate. This is the first project ever developed that invites citizens’ direct input to forensic science research, and the first project ever developed in which citizens shape future criminal sentencing standards.

Your perspectives on depraved crime should be included in the Depravity Standard. Therefore, we ask that you participate in this landmark project. Thank you for your interest. Want to learn more?

https://depravityscale.org/depscale/

Dorner, Folk Hero of the Left

February 14, 2013 By Matthew Vadum

Nobody loves cop killers more than left-wingers do.

The grotesque outpouring of love for cop killer Chris Dorner, an ex-cop now presumed dead in a fiery shootout at Big Bear Lake, California, should make all sane Americans fear for the future of their country.

Dorner is suspected of killing at least one police officer and two others. He allegedly gunned down 28-year-old Monica Quan and her husband-to-be 27-year-old Keith Lawrence outside their home. Quan’s father Randy, a former Los Angeles Police Department officer turned lawyer, represented Dorner in disciplinary hearings that resulted in Dorner’s dismissal. Dorner reportedly called Mr. Quan days after the murder to taunt him.

Dorner’s cross-country rampage has been met in recent days with Facebook fan pages, sympathetic statements on Twitter, and grassroots-level enthusiasm for this brutal sociopath.

But making vicious killers into folk heroes is nothing new for the Left. American history in recent decades is bursting with cop killers romanticized by the Left.

Among those who have stuck it to The Man by killing “pigs” are: Troy Davis, executed in 2011 for murdering police officer Mark MacPhail as he came to the aid of an assault victim; Lovelle Mixon, killed in a gunfight with police in 2009; Mumia abu-Jamal, imprisoned for life for the 1981 murder of a police officer; Leonard Peltier, convicted in 1977 for gunning down FBI agents; Assata Shakur, escaped from prison in 1979, a member of the Black Panther Party (BPP) and Black Liberation Army (BLA), having been granted “asylum” in Cuba; and 1960s radicals like Marilyn Buck.

In a rambling self-incriminating manifesto that Dorner posted online, the ex-Los Angeles police officer says “No one grows up and wants to be a cop killer … but, as a young police officer I found that the violent suspects on the streets are not the only people you have to watch.”

Dorner argues that he is sacrificing himself for the greater good by going on his murder spree, which he refers to as “a necessary evil” aimed at effecting change in the Los Angeles Police Department. “The only thing that changes policy and garners attention is death.”

In one of several chilling passages, Dorner waxes philosophical: “Let the balance of loss of life take place. Sometimes a reset needs to occur.”

In his online screed, Dorner praises an assortment of left-wingers. He lauds President Obama for doing what he considers a good job under difficult circumstances. For their anti-Second Amendment efforts, Dorner hails TV host Piers Morgan, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), and Vice President Joe Biden. He also gives shout-outs to a galaxy of celebrities and public figures. Complimenting the First Lady on her hairstyle, he interjects, “Off the record, I love your new bangs, Mrs. Obama.”

There are also those slippery souls who stop short of endorsing Dorner’s killing spree, but who ponder aloud whether society drove him to murder. Their musings bear a creepy similarity to the Left’s post-9/11 hand-wringing about the true “root causes” of the attacks on America.

MSNBC ranter Chris Matthews and death row groupie Marc Lamont Hill suggest that Dorner’s online essay is a kind of petition for redress of grievances that needs to be taken seriously.

Matthews suggested Americans shouldn’t be so quick to judge Dorner because he may have had a legitimate beef against the LAPD. He asked reporter Andrew Blankstein, “How do you write a story like this that’s objective for the big metropolitan paper, the Los Angeles Times?”

Matthews added, “Are there people in your newsroom, editors who are saying, ‘We have to be careful here. It’s not simple. This man may have a complaint.’”

Matthews, of course, has never been concerned about fairness for non-leftists. He prefers to lump nonviolent Tea Party supporters in with the Taliban and the Third Reich.

Hill, host of HuffPost Live and a professor at Columbia University, said the Dorner saga is a needed civics lesson for the public about racism and the excessive use of force. “This has been an important conversation that we’ve had about police brutality, about police corruption, about state violence.”

“As far as Dorner himself goes, he’s been like a real life superhero to many people,” Hill said. Adding an obligatory disclaimer, Hill said, “What he did was awful, killing innocent people was bad, but when you read his manifesto, when you read the message that he left, he wasn’t entirely crazy.”

Those cheering on Dorner were happy to see him exact vengeance against a corrupt system, Hill said. “It’s almost like watching Django Unchained in real life … It’s kind of exciting.”

Hill has a soft spot for those who murder police officers. He co-authored The Classroom and the Cell: Conversations on Black Life in America (Third World Press, 2012) with Mumia abu-Jamal. Mumia, as left-wingers affectionately call him, is celebrated as a political prisoner even though in court he has never denied shooting Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner execution-style.

The book is essentially a transcript of a mutual admiration society, as the two radicals trade compliments and insights about how rotten America is. Hill tells Mumia that “you’re in prison but somehow still free, while I’m out here feeling profoundly un-free.”

Even this highly successful black man with his Ivy League Ph.D. who is sometimes called a “celebrity intellectual,” feels oppressed by American society.

“But to some degree, I feel un-free because I’m still encumbered by the very things that I’m critiquing in my work: consumerism, patriarchy even White supremacy … I’m trying to heal, man.”

Not surprisingly, in 2009 Fox News fired Hill as a paid on-air contributor after he acquired a reputation for defending cop killers and racists. But somehow he keeps finding his way back onto TV screens.

Meanwhile, the ever-resourceful self-described “communist” Van Jones is urging Americans not to concern themselves with Dorner’s decidedly left-of-center views.

“In the wake of a tragedy, it is understandable to ask why this happened,” says Jones. “It is appropriate to discuss ways to keep it from happening again. But we should draw the line at suddenly giving an exalted place in our national discourse to the political rantings of a murderer.”

How convenient, especially since Dorner’s views on cops seem to differ little from his own. Forced out as President Obama’s green jobs czar in 2009 for signing a 9/11 “truther” petition, Jones is a longtime supporter of convicted cop killer Mumia abu-Jamal. Jones founded Oakland’s Ella Baker Center for Human Rights in order to combat perceived police brutality.

But with Barack Obama in power, it is more difficult to be shocked by sympathetic reactions to Dorner.

The people doing the cheering are the Democratic Party’s electoral base.

Obama himself invites rappers who praise cop killers to perform at the White House.

One such entertainer, Common, is known for performing, “A Song For Assata,” which is a tribute to fugitive black militant Assata Shakur. Here’s one verse from the tune:

“In the spirit of God.
In the spirit of the ancestors.
In the spirit of the Black Panthers.
In the spirit of Assata Shakur.
We make this movement towards freedom
For all those who have been oppressed, and all those in the struggle.
Yeah. yo, check it-
I wonder what would happen if that woulda been me?
All this shit so we could be free, so dig it, y’all.”

Common believes Shakur is a martyr. That’s one of the reasons he was invited to the White House. Obama and those who sympathize with cop killers are on the same wavelength.

If someone writes a song about Dorner, don’t be surprised if the person shows up at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/matthew-vadum/dorner-folk-hero-of-the-left/

Background Articles and Videos

Police Shoot Man Over 40 Times (Video)

Marc Lamont Hill Slams Obama’s Drone Policy: Unlike Bush, ‘We Refuse To Hold Him

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 98, February 15, 2013: Segment 0: Dr. Benjamin Carson’s Amazing Speech at the National Prayer Breakfast — Gifted Hands — Who Gives Children A Second Chance –Videos

Pronk Pops Show 98, February 15, 2013: Segment 2: Obama’s Kill List–Drones–Remotely Piloted Aircraft–RPAs–Killing Machines–We Don’t Torture Terrorists–We Kill Americans, Civilians and Children in Undeclared Wars–Obama is Judge, Jury, and Executioner–Hope, Change, and Murder, Inc.–The Mass Murderer In The White House–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 98, February 15, 2013: Segment 0: Dr. Benjamin Carson’s Amazing Speech at the National Prayer Breakfast — Gifted Hands — Who Gives Children A Second Chance –Videos

Posted on February 15, 2013. Filed under: American History, Business, Communications, Culture, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Government, Government Spending, Health Care, Health Care Insurance, History, Investments, Law, Media, Politics, Polls, Security, Videos, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 98: February 15, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 97: February 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 96: February 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 95: January 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 94: December 7, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 93: November 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 92: November 10, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 91: November 5, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 0: Dr. Benjamin Carson’s Amazing Speech at the National Prayer Breakfast — Gifted Hands — Who Gives Children A Second Chance –Videos

carson1

America_the_Beautiful

BenCarsonScrubs

Carson-and-Bush

Dr. Benjamin Carson’s Amazing Speech at the National Prayer Breakfast with

Dr. Benjamin Carson On Sean Hannity Explains Why He Felt The Need To Lecture

Dr Carson: Straight-Talking Speech Brings Rave Reviews

The Five Panel Celebrates Conservative Doctor Who Criticized Obama To His Face

Sleepy Obama Sits Through Prayer Breakfast Where Dr. Benjamin Carson Blasts

gifted_hands

Doctor’s Amazing Grace, Life and Speech

By Raymond Thomas Pronk

Ever hear a speaker that got your attention and kept it for an entire speech?

Dr. Benjamin Carson, world-renowned neurosurgeon, told the National Prayer Breakfast audience in Washington that his mother, who had a third-grade education and worked three jobs as a domestic, knew he and his brother were smart, made them turn off the television and read two books a week from the public library and write reports about them.

“You know, after a while, I actually began to enjoy reading those books because we were very poor, but between the covers of those books I could go anywhere, I could be anybody, I could do anything. I began to read about people of great accomplishment; and as I read those stories, I began to see a connecting thread. I began to see that the person who has the most to do with you and what happens to you in life is you. You make decisions. You decide how much energy you want to put behind that decision. And I came to understand that I had control of my own destiny. And, at that point, I didn’t hate poverty anymore, because I knew it was only temporary. I knew I could change that. It was incredibly liberating for me, made all the difference.”

Carson commented upon education, fiscal irresponsibility, taxes and health care.

“Why is it so important that we educate our people? Because we don’t want to go down the pathway as so many pinnacle nations that have preceded us. I think particularly about ancient Rome. Very powerful. Nobody could even challenge them militarily, but what happened to them? They destroyed themselves from within. Moral decay, fiscal irresponsibility,” he said.

Carson would replace the existing federal income tax system with a flat and fair tax modeled after the tithe. He said, “What about our taxation system? So complex there is no one who can possibly comply with every jot and tittle of our tax system. If I wanted to get you, I could get you on a tax issue. That doesn’t make any sense. What we need to do is come up with something that is simple.”

He continued, “When I pick up my Bible, you know what I see? I see the fairest individual in the Universe, God, and he’s given us a system. It’s called tithe. Now we don’t necessarily have to do it 10 percent but it’s principle. He didn’t say, if your crops fail, don’t give me any tithes. He didn’t say, if you have a bumper crop, give me triple tithes. So there must be something inherently fair about proportionality.”

A practicing physician, Carson briefly outlined his alternative solution to the health care crisis: “When a person is born, give him a birth certificate, an electronic medical record, and a health savings account to which money can be contributed—pretax—from the time you’re born ’til the time you die. If you die, you can pass it on to your family members, and there’s nobody talking about death panels. We can make contributions for people who are indigent. Instead of sending all this money to some bureaucracy, let’s put it in their HSAs. Now they have some control over their own health care. And very quickly they’re going to learn how to be responsible.”

Carson said the response to his speech has been “overwhelmingly” positive.

Carson’s life is one of achievement and success through hard work and persistence. Carson graduated from Yale University, majoring in psychology and the University of Michigan, school of medicine. He completed his internship in general surgery and his residency in neurological surgery at The Johns Hopkins Medical Institution.

When he was 33, Carson became the youngest director of the Division of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins.

Medical history was made in 1987 by Carson and his surgical team, when they operated for 22 hours and separated the back of the heads of conjoined twins (the Binder twins). The twins survived and live independently today.

Carson’s medical practice focuses on traumatic brain injuries, brain and spinal cord tumors, achondroplasia, neurological and congenital disorders, craniosynostosis, epilepsy and trigeminal neuralgia.

In 1994 Carson and his wife, Candy, created the Carson Scholars Fund which awards each year a “$1,000 college scholarship for students in grades 4-11 who excel academically and are dedicated to serving their community.” More than 5,200 scholarships and medals have been awarded across the nation.

carson_scholars

Dr. Carson with some of the Carson Scholars with their Olympic-size metals.

Credit: http://carsonscholars.org/scholarships/about-our-scholarships

He has written more than 100 neurosurgical publications and several bestselling books including “Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story,” “Think Big,” “The Big Picture,” “Take The Risk,” and his most recent, “America the Beautiful: Rediscovering What Made This Nation Great.”

“Gifted Hands,” a made-for TV movie about Carson’s life starring Academy Award winner Cuba Gooding Jr. as Carson and Kimberly Elise as his mother Sonja was broadcast in 2007.

In 2008 Carson received the nation’s highest civilian award, the Medal of Freedom, from President George W. Bush in the White House.

Celebrate black history month by listening to Carson’s speech and viewing his compelling life story, both of which are readily available on YouTube.

Raymond Thomas Pronk is host of the Pronk Pops Show on KDUX web radio from 3-5 p.m. Fridays and author of the companion blog http://www.pronkpops.wordpress.com/

Gifted Hands Dr Ben Carson

Excerpts from Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story

Hopkins Doctor Honored At White House

Gifted Hands

Gifted Hands- the Ben Carson Story

gifted hands . the ben carson story

Ben Carson – Liberty University Convocation

Dr Benjamin Carson : In His Image

Background Information and Videos

Ben Carson biography

http://www.biography.com/people/ben-carson-475422

Dr. Ben Carson- Achieving Total HEALTH

Ben Carson: An Extraordinary Life – Conversations from Penn State

Dr Benjamin Carson

Great Risks Bring Greater Success – Dr. Ben Carson

Newsmakers — Dr. Ben Carson

New York Times Best-Selling Author Dr. Ben Carson on Health Disparities

Dr. Ben Carson Q&A Session

Benjamin Carson

Benjamin Solomon “Ben” Carson, Sr. (born September 18, 1951) is an African American neurosurgeon and the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital. He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award in the United States, by President George W. Bush in 2008.

Early life

Carson was born in Detroit, Michigan and was raised by his single mother, Sonya Carson.[1] He struggled academically throughout elementary school, but started to excel in middle school and throughout high school. After graduating with honors from Southwestern High School, he attended Yale University, where he earned a degree in Psychology. He chose to go to Yale because in College Bowl, an old knowledge competition TV program, he saw Yale compete against and defeat many other colleges, including Harvard. Carson wanted to participate in College Bowl, but the program was discontinued. From Yale, he attended University of Michigan Medical School.

Career

Carson’s hand-eye coordination and three-dimensional reasoning skills made him a gifted surgeon.[2] After medical school, he became a neurosurgery resident at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore. Starting off as an adult neurosurgeon, Carson became more interested in pediatrics. He believed that with children, “what you see is what you get,[2] … when they’re in pain they clearly show it with a frown on their face or when they are happy they show it by smiling brightly.”

At age 33, he became the youngest major division director in Johns Hopkins history, as Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery. Carson’s other surgical innovations have included the first intrauterine procedure to relieve pressure on the brain of a hydrocephalic fetal twin, and a hemispherectomy, in which a young girl suffering from uncontrollable seizures had one half of her brain removed.

In 1987, Carson made medical history by being the first surgeon to successfully separate conjoined twins (the Binder twins) who had been joined at the back of the head (craniopagus twins). The 70-member surgical team, led by Carson, worked for 22 hours. At the end, the twins were successfully separated and can now survive independently. Carson recalls:

I looked at that situation. I said, ‘Why is it that this is such a disaster?’ and it was because they would always exsanguinate. They would bleed to death, and I said, ‘There’s got to be a way around that. These are modern times.’ This was back in 1987. I was talking to a friend of mine, who was a cardiothoracic surgeon, who was the chief of the division, and I said, ‘You guys operate on the heart in babies, how do you keep them from exsanguinating’ and he says, ‘Well, we put them in hypothermic arrest.’ I said, ‘Is there any reason that – if we were doing a set of Siamese twins that were joined at the head – that we couldn’t put them into hypothermic arrest, at the appropriate time, when we’re likely to lose a lot of blood?’ and he said, ‘No way .’ I said, ‘Wow, this is great.’ Then I said, ‘Why am I putting my time into this? I’m not going to see any Siamese twins.’ So I kind of forgot about it, and lo and behold, two months later, along came these doctors from Germany, presenting this case of Siamese twins. And, I was asked for my opinion, and I then began to explain the techniques that should be used, and how we would incorporate hypothermic arrest, and everybody said ‘Wow! That sounds like it might work.’ And, my colleagues and I, a few of us went over to Germany. We looked at the twins. We actually put in scalp expanders, and five months later we brought them over and did the operation, and lo and behold, it worked.[3]

Awards and honors

Carson has received numerous honors and many awards over the years, including over 60 honorary doctorate degrees. He was also a member of the American Academy of Achievement, the Horatio Alger Association of Distinguished Americans, the [[Alpha Omega Alpha|Alpha

Publications and appearances

Carson has written four bestselling books published by Zondervan, an international Christian media and publishing company: Gifted Hands, The Big Picture, Take the Risk, and Think Big. The first book is an autobiography and two are about his personal philosophies of success that incorporate hard work and a faith in God; Carson is a Seventh-day Adventist. In a debate with Richard Dawkins, Francis Collins, and Daniel Dennett, Carson stated he doesn’t believe in evolution: “I don’t believe in evolution…evolution says that because there are these similarities, even though we can’t specifically connect them, it proves that this is what happened.”[4]

A video documentary about Carson’s life titled Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story was released by Zondervan in 1992. Subsequently in 2009, a separate television movie with the same title premiered on TNT on February 7, 2009, with Academy Award winner Cuba Gooding Jr. in the lead role and Kimberly Elise portraying his mother.[5]

On February 7, 2013, Dr. Carson was a key speaker at the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast.[6]

Personal life

In June 2002 Carson was forced to cut back on his public appearances when he was diagnosed with prostate cancer, but the cancer was caught in time. He still operates on more than 300 children a year, but has been trying to shorten his days: prior to his cancer he used to work from 7:00 in the morning until 8:00 at night.[7]

Carson and his wife Lacena “Candy” Rustin met at Yale in 1971 when he was a junior and she was a freshman; they married in 1975. Candy holds an M.B.A. degree and is an accomplished musician, and both are members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Carson’s life and work was so admired in 2007 that a feature film was made about the doctor, “Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story”.[8][9]

Publications

  • (2011) America the Beautiful: Rediscovering What Made This Nation Great, Zondervan Publishing. ISBN 978-0310330714
  • (2009) Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story, Zondervan Publishing. ISBN 0-310-21469-6
  • (2008) Take The Risk, Zondervan Publishing. ISBN 0-310-25973-8
  • (2000) The Big Picture, Zondervan Publishing. ISBN 978-0310225836
  • (1996) Think Big, Zondervan Publishing. ISBN 0-310-21459-9
  • (1990) Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story, Review & Herald Pub., ISBN 0-8280-0669-5

References

  1. ^ Ben Carson Biography – Facts, Birthday, Life Story – Biography.com
  2. ^ a b Conversation from Penn State: Ben Carson Interview.
  3. ^ Biography and Video Interview of Benjamin Carson at Academy of Achievement.
  4. ^ Richard Dawkins & Daniel Dennett vs. Francis Collins & Benjamin Carson : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive
  5. ^ Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story (2009) at the Internet Movie Database
  6. ^ “Zondervan Author Ben Carson Gives Keynote at 2013 National Prayer Breakfast”. prnewswire.com. Retrieved 8 February 2013.
  7. ^ Encyclopedia of World Biography: Biography of Benjamin S. Carson.
  8. ^ “7 FASCINATING FACTS ABOUT DR. CARSON — THE PRAYER BREAKFAST SPEAKER WHOSE SPEECH IN FRONT OF OBAMA WENT VIRAL”. TheBlaze. 8 February 2013.
  9. ^ “Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story”. IMBd. 7 February 2009.

External links

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 98, February 15, 2013: Segment 1: Chris Dorner–New Left’s New Social Justice Hero: Black Veteran Ex-L.A.P.D. Cop Killer — Another Lone Wolf Killer–Go Figure–Depravity Scale–Police Execute Killer By Burning Cabin–Police Were Judge, Jury, and Executioner — Vigilante Justice — Videos

Pronk Pops Show 98, February 15, 2013: Segment 2: Obama’s Kill List–Drones–Remotely Piloted Aircraft–RPAs–Killing Machines–We Don’t Torture Terrorists–We Kill Americans, Civilians and Children in Undeclared Wars–Obama is Judge, Jury, and Executioner–Hope, Change, and Murder, Inc.–The Mass Murderer In The White House–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 97, February 8, 2013: Segment 2: The Coming Collapse and Fall of the United States of America–Doug Casey, Gerald Celente, Marc Faber, Michael Maloney, Jim Richards, Jim Rogers, and Peter Schiff — Videos

Posted on February 8, 2013. Filed under: American History, Budgetary Policy, Communications, Consitutional Law, Economics, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Government, Government Spending, History, Illegal Immigration, Investments, Labor Economics, Law, Media, Monetary Policy, Philosophy, Politics, Polls, Public Sector Unions, Regulation, Tax Policy, Unions, Videos, Violence, War, Wisdom |

Pronk Pops Show 97: February 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 96: February 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 95: January 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 94: December 7, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 93: November 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 92: November 10, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 91: November 5, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 2: The Coming Collapse and Fall of the United States of America–Doug Casey, Gerald Celente,  Marc Faber, Michael Maloney, Jim Richards, Jim Rogers, and Peter Schiff — Videos

financial_bubble

bubble-lifecycle.gif

financialcollapse

dollar-toilet-paper

kleptcrocy

The Collapse of The American Dream Explained in Animation

The First 12 Hours of a US Dollar Collapse

Doug Casey on the Problem with Glenn Beck’s Galt’s Gulch (and much more)

BEST DOUG CASEY SPEECH EVER! An Anarchist, Economic Collapse & 7 billion Chi

Doug Casey talks to James Turk

Doug Casey interviews Peter Schiff

RAGING CURRENCY WARFARE!

Gerald Celente Economic Collapse IMMINENT Gerald Celente Today

Marc Faber ‘We Are in the End Game’ – Economic Collapse

How does the Global Financial Crisis End – Michael Maloney explains

Jim Rickards: the Fed is Racing to Create Inflation Before the US Economy Implodes

Jim Rogers Predicts Global Depression In 2013-2014

The Dollar Collapse Revisited and a Bull Market in US Treasuries w/Peter Schiff!

Press Conference with FOMC Chairman Ben S. Bernanke

Conversations with Casey

http://www.caseyresearch.com/cwc

U.S. Dollar Collapse: Where is Germany’s Gold?

By Peter Schiff

The financial world was shocked this month by a demand from Germany’s Bundesbank to repatriate a large portion of its gold reserves held abroad. By 2020, Germany wants 50% of its total gold reserves back in Frankfurt – including 300 tons from the Federal Reserve. The Bundesbank’s announcement comes just three months after the Fed refused to submit to an audit of its holdings on Germany’s behalf. One cannot help but wonder if the refusal triggered the demand.

Either way, Germany appears to be waking up to a reality for which central banks around the world have been preparing: the dollar is no longer the world’s safe-haven asset and the US government is no longer a trustworthy banker for foreign nations. It looks like their fears are well-grounded, given the Fed’s seeming inability to return what is legally Germany’s gold in a timely manner. Germany is a developed and powerful nation with the second largest gold reserves in the world. If they can’t rely on Washington to keep its promises, who can?

Where is Germany’s Gold?

The impact of Germany’s repatriation on the dollar revolves around an unanswered question: why will it take seven years to complete the transfer?

The popular explanation is that the Fed has already rehypothecated all of its gold holdings in the name of other countries. That is, the same mound of bullion is earmarked as collateral for a host of different lenders. Since the Fed depends on a fractional-reserve banking system for its very existence, it would not come as a surprise that it has become a fractional-reserve bank itself. If so, then perhaps Germany politely asked for a seven-year timeline in order to allow the Fed to save face, and to prevent other depositors from clamoring for their own gold back – a ‘run’ on the Fed.

Now, the Fed can always print more dollars and buy gold on the open market to make up for any shortfall, but such a move could substantially increase the price of gold. The last thing the Fed needs is another gold price spike reminding the world of the dollar’s decline.

Speculation Aside

None of these theories are substantiated, but no matter how you slice it, Germany’s request for its gold does not bode well for the future of the dollar. In fact, the Bundesbank’s official statements are all you need to confirm the Germans’ waning faith in the US.

Last October, after the Bundesbank had requested an audit of its Fed holdings, Executive Board Member Carl-Ludwig Thiele was asked in an interview why the bank kept so much of Germany’s gold overseas. His response emphasized the importance of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency:

Thiele’s statement can lead us to only one conclusion: by keeping fewer reserves in the US, Germany foresees less future need for “US dollar-denominated liquidity.””Gold stored in your home safe is not immediately available as collateral in case you need foreign currency. Take, for instance, the key role that the US dollar plays as a reserve currency in the global financial system. The gold held with the New York Fed can, in a crisis, be pledged with the Federal Reserve Bank as collateral against US dollar-denominated liquidity.”

History Repeats

The whole situation mirrors the late 1960s, during a period that led up to the “Nixon Shock.” Back then, the world was on the Bretton Woods System – an attempt on the part of Western central bankers to pin the dollar to gold at a fixed rate, while still allowing the metal to trade privately as a commodity. This led to a gap between the market price of gold as a commodity and the official price available from the Treasury.

As the true value of gold separated further and further from its official rate, the world began to realize the system was unsustainable, and many suspected the US was not serious about maintaining a strong dollar. West Germany moved first on these fears by redeeming its dollar reserves for gold, followed by France, Switzerland, and others. This eventually culminated in Nixon “closing the gold window” in 1971 by ending any link between the dollar and gold. This “Nixon Shock” spurred chronic inflation throughout the ’70s and a concurrent rally in gold.

Perhaps the entire international community is thinking back to the ’60s, because Germany isn’t the only country maneuvering away from the dollar today. The Netherlands and Azerbaijan are also discussing repatriating their foreign gold holdings. And every month, we hear about central banks increasing gold reserves. The latest are Russia and Kazakhstan, but in the last year, countries from Brazil to Turkey have been adding to their gold holdings in order to diversify away from fiat currency reserves.

And don’t forget China. Once the biggest purchaser of US bonds, it is now a net seller of Treasuries, while simultaneously gobbling up gold. Some sources even claim that China has unofficially surpassed Germany as the second largest holder of gold in the world.

Unlike the ’60s, today there is no official gold window to close. There will be no reported “shock” indicator of a dollar flight. This demand by Germany may be the closest indicator we’re going to get. Placing blame where it’s due, let’s call it the “Bernanke Shock.”

It Takes One to Know One

In last month’s Gold Letter, I wrote about the three pillars supporting the US Treasury’s persistently low interest rates: the Fed, domestic investors, and foreign central banks – led by Japan. I examined how Japan’s plans to radically devalue the yen may undermine that country’s ability to continue buying Treasuries, which could cause the other pillars to become unstable as well.

While private investors and even the Fed might be deluding themselves into believing US bonds are still a viable investment, Germany’s repatriation news makes it clear that foreign governments are no longer buying the propaganda. And why should they? If anyone should appreciate the real constraints the US government is facing, it is other governments.

Our sovereign creditors know that Ben Bernanke and Barack Obama are just regular men in fancy suits. They know the Fed isn’t harboring some ingenious plan for raising interest rates while successfully selling back its worthless mortgage and government securities. Instead, the Fed is like a drug addict making any excuse to get its next fix. [See Bernanke’s tell-all interview with Oprah where he confesses to economic doping!]

US investors should be as shocked as the Bundesbank about the Fed’s deception. While we cannot redeem our dollars for gold with the Fed, we can still buy gold with them in the open market. As more investors and governments choose to save in precious metals, the dollar’s value will go into steeper and steeper decline – thereby driving more investors into metals. That’s when the virtuous circle upon which the dollar has coasted for a generation will quickly turn vicious.

Peter Schiff is president of Euro Pacific Capital and author of The Little Book of Bull Moves in Bear Markets and Crash Proof: How to Profit from the Coming Economic Collapse. His latest book is The Real Crash: America’s Coming Bankruptcy, How to Save Yourself and Your Country.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-dollar-collapse-where-is-germanys-gold/5321894

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 97: Segment 1: The Run On The Fed–Countries Demanding Their Gold Reserves Back–The Currency War Gets Hot–Videos

Posted on February 8, 2013. Filed under: American History, Budgetary Policy, Business, Communications, Economics, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Government, Government Spending, History, Investments, Law, Media, Monetary Policy, Philosophy, Politics, Polls, Resources, Security, Tax Policy, Videos, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 97: February 8, 2013 

Pronk Pops Show 96: February 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 95: January 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 94: December 7, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 93: November 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 92: November 10, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 91: November 5, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 1: The Run On The Fed–Countries Demanding Their Gold Reserves Back–The Currency War Gets Hot–Videos

gold3

GoldBycountry

Germany Repatriates Gold From France and US

James Turk on the Central Bank Gold Heist and Bundesbank Accounting Shenaniga

Bringing in the bullion Germany to repatriate gold from US and France

Germany Moves To Relocate Gold From New York Fed to Bundesbank

Germany Wants Its Gold Back From the Fed

Keiser Report: Welcome Home German Gold (E395)

Is Germany About to Start a Run on Gold Held at the New York Fed?

German lawmakers are to review Bundesbank controls of and management of Germany’s gold reserves. Parliament’s Budget Committee will assess how the central bank manages its inventory of Germany’s gold bullion bars that are believed to be stored not only in Frankfurt, but at locations outside Germany, according to German newspaper Bild.

What’s most interesting about all this is that Germany may follow in Hugo Chavez’s footsteps and repatriate their gold to Germany so as to have direct possession of and ownership of their gold reserves. It’s really the only way to protect a central bank’s gold ownership, since by simply going in and asking the New York Fed to show Germany “their” gold, the Fed can walk them in and show them a pile of gold and tell them that it is theirs. The next day they can walk Chinese officials in and show the Chinese the exact same pile of gold and tell them that the gold is theirs.

Possession is the only sure protection.

Germany’s huge gold reserves – 3,396.3 tonnes of gold are some 73.7% of Germany’s national foreign exchange reserves, and are held not only in Germany but at the New York Fed, in London and in Paris. Dumb.

What kind of pressure will the U.S. put on Germany to prevent them from repatriating their gold? The banksters clearly have German Chancellor Merkel in their pocket, but this is unlikely to be influence that is deep into German political leaders. Thus, a run on gold, started by Germany, is not an impossibility.

In this scenario, the noise you would hear is the spike in gold as Bernanke prints more dollars for open market purchases of gold to fill demand for delivery by various central banks. Yikes.

(ViaJamesMiller)

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/03/is-germany-about-to-start-run-on-gold.html

U.S. Dollar Collapse: Where is Germany’s Gold?

By Peter Schiff

The financial world was shocked this month by a demand from Germany’s Bundesbank to repatriate a large portion of its gold reserves held abroad. By 2020, Germany wants 50% of its total gold reserves back in Frankfurt – including 300 tons from the Federal Reserve. The Bundesbank’s announcement comes just three months after the Fed refused to submit to an audit of its holdings on Germany’s behalf. One cannot help but wonder if the refusal triggered the demand.

Either way, Germany appears to be waking up to a reality for which central banks around the world have been preparing: the dollar is no longer the world’s safe-haven asset and the US government is no longer a trustworthy banker for foreign nations. It looks like their fears are well-grounded, given the Fed’s seeming inability to return what is legally Germany’s gold in a timely manner. Germany is a developed and powerful nation with the second largest gold reserves in the world. If they can’t rely on Washington to keep its promises, who can?

Where is Germany’s Gold?

The impact of Germany’s repatriation on the dollar revolves around an unanswered question: why will it take seven years to complete the transfer?

The popular explanation is that the Fed has already rehypothecated all of its gold holdings in the name of other countries. That is, the same mound of bullion is earmarked as collateral for a host of different lenders. Since the Fed depends on a fractional-reserve banking system for its very existence, it would not come as a surprise that it has become a fractional-reserve bank itself. If so, then perhaps Germany politely asked for a seven-year timeline in order to allow the Fed to save face, and to prevent other depositors from clamoring for their own gold back – a ‘run’ on the Fed.

Now, the Fed can always print more dollars and buy gold on the open market to make up for any shortfall, but such a move could substantially increase the price of gold. The last thing the Fed needs is another gold price spike reminding the world of the dollar’s decline.

Speculation Aside

None of these theories are substantiated, but no matter how you slice it, Germany’s request for its gold does not bode well for the future of the dollar. In fact, the Bundesbank’s official statements are all you need to confirm the Germans’ waning faith in the US.

Last October, after the Bundesbank had requested an audit of its Fed holdings, Executive Board Member Carl-Ludwig Thiele was asked in an interview why the bank kept so much of Germany’s gold overseas. His response emphasized the importance of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency:

Thiele’s statement can lead us to only one conclusion: by keeping fewer reserves in the US, Germany foresees less future need for “US dollar-denominated liquidity.””Gold stored in your home safe is not immediately available as collateral in case you need foreign currency. Take, for instance, the key role that the US dollar plays as a reserve currency in the global financial system. The gold held with the New York Fed can, in a crisis, be pledged with the Federal Reserve Bank as collateral against US dollar-denominated liquidity.”

History Repeats

The whole situation mirrors the late 1960s, during a period that led up to the “Nixon Shock.” Back then, the world was on the Bretton Woods System – an attempt on the part of Western central bankers to pin the dollar to gold at a fixed rate, while still allowing the metal to trade privately as a commodity. This led to a gap between the market price of gold as a commodity and the official price available from the Treasury.

As the true value of gold separated further and further from its official rate, the world began to realize the system was unsustainable, and many suspected the US was not serious about maintaining a strong dollar. West Germany moved first on these fears by redeeming its dollar reserves for gold, followed by France, Switzerland, and others. This eventually culminated in Nixon “closing the gold window” in 1971 by ending any link between the dollar and gold. This “Nixon Shock” spurred chronic inflation throughout the ’70s and a concurrent rally in gold.

Perhaps the entire international community is thinking back to the ’60s, because Germany isn’t the only country maneuvering away from the dollar today. The Netherlands and Azerbaijan are also discussing repatriating their foreign gold holdings. And every month, we hear about central banks increasing gold reserves. The latest are Russia and Kazakhstan, but in the last year, countries from Brazil to Turkey have been adding to their gold holdings in order to diversify away from fiat currency reserves.

And don’t forget China. Once the biggest purchaser of US bonds, it is now a net seller of Treasuries, while simultaneously gobbling up gold. Some sources even claim that China has unofficially surpassed Germany as the second largest holder of gold in the world.

Unlike the ’60s, today there is no official gold window to close. There will be no reported “shock” indicator of a dollar flight. This demand by Germany may be the closest indicator we’re going to get. Placing blame where it’s due, let’s call it the “Bernanke Shock.”

It Takes One to Know One

In last month’s Gold Letter, I wrote about the three pillars supporting the US Treasury’s persistently low interest rates: the Fed, domestic investors, and foreign central banks – led by Japan. I examined how Japan’s plans to radically devalue the yen may undermine that country’s ability to continue buying Treasuries, which could cause the other pillars to become unstable as well.

While private investors and even the Fed might be deluding themselves into believing US bonds are still a viable investment, Germany’s repatriation news makes it clear that foreign governments are no longer buying the propaganda. And why should they? If anyone should appreciate the real constraints the US government is facing, it is other governments.

Our sovereign creditors know that Ben Bernanke and Barack Obama are just regular men in fancy suits. They know the Fed isn’t harboring some ingenious plan for raising interest rates while successfully selling back its worthless mortgage and government securities. Instead, the Fed is like a drug addict making any excuse to get its next fix. [See Bernanke’s tell-all interview with Oprah where he confesses to economic doping!]

US investors should be as shocked as the Bundesbank about the Fed’s deception. While we cannot redeem our dollars for gold with the Fed, we can still buy gold with them in the open market. As more investors and governments choose to save in precious metals, the dollar’s value will go into steeper and steeper decline – thereby driving more investors into metals. That’s when the virtuous circle upon which the dollar has coasted for a generation will quickly turn vicious.

Peter Schiff is president of Euro Pacific Capital and author of The Little Book of Bull Moves in Bear Markets and Crash Proof: How to Profit from the Coming Economic Collapse. His latest book is The Real Crash: America’s Coming Bankruptcy, How to Save Yourself and Your Country.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-dollar-collapse-where-is-germanys-gold/5321894

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 97, February 8, 2013: Segment 0: Dereliction of Duty By President and Commander-In-Chief Obama–Sleeping While Americans Died–The Big Coverup and Scandal–The President Lied–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 97, February 8, 2013: Segment 0: Dereliction of Duty By President and Commander-In-Chief Obama–Sleeping While Americans Died–The Big Coverup and Scandal–The President Lied–Videos

Posted on February 8, 2013. Filed under: American History, Communications, Crime, Foreign Policy, Government Spending, History, Oil, Philosophy, Pistols, Politics, Radio, Rifles, Security, Success, Technology, Violence, War, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 97: February 8, 2013 

Pronk Pops Show 96: February 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 95: January 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 94: December 7, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 93: November 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 92: November 10, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 91: November 5, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 0: Dereliction of Duty By President and Commander-In-Chief Obama–Sleeping While Americans Died–The Big Coverup and Scandal–The President Lied–Videos

panic.panic.button

Obama-AWOL-Benghazi

benghazi-cover-up

Benghazi_VICTIMS-2

Dereliction of duty is a specific offense under United States Code Title 10,892. Article 92 and applies to all branches of the US military. A service member who is derelict has willfully refused to perform his duties (or follow a given order) or has incapacitated himself in such a way that he cannot perform his duties. Such incapacitation includes the person falling asleep while on duty requiring wakefulness, his getting drunk or otherwise intoxicated and consequently being unable to perform his duties, or his vacating his post contrary to regulations.

TIMELINE OF EVENTS: HOW THE RESCUE OPERATION UNFOLDED

  • Four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, were killed in a six-hour, commando-style attack on the US Mission on September 11
  • CIA Director David Petraeus did not attend the ceremony when the coffins arrived back in US to conceal the CIA operation in eastern Libya
  • Al Qaeda in North Africa and Islamist militia Ansar al-Sharia were implicated
  • Timeline of CIA involvement blows open the dramatic sequence of events, revealing that of 30 American officials there, 23 were with the CIA
  • CIA team had been operating out of a building known as ‘the annex’, less than half a mile away from the consulate in central Benghazi
  • Timeline reveals heroic rescue effort by CIA team and the terrifying firefight they encountered

9.40pm – CIA officials in ‘The Annex’ get a distress call from the consulate saying they are under attack.

10.05pm – Armed only with handguns, team of about six CIA security officers leave their base for the public diplomatic mission compound.

10.30pm – With bullets whistling overhead, the CIA team move into the compound after unsuccessfully trying to get heavy weapons and help from local Libyan allies.

11.10pm – A Defense Department drone, which had been on an unrelated mission some distance away, arrived in Benghazi to help officials on the ground gather information.

11.30pm – U.S. personnel who had been working or staying at the mission all accounted for, except for Ambassador Stevens.

11.40pm – Driving back to the secure base, the evacuees come under further fire.

12am – The installation itself comes under fire from small arms and rocket-propelled grenades.

12am – A CIA security team based in Tripoli, which included two U.S. military officers, lands at Benghazi airport and begins plotting how to locate the missing ambassador.

1am – The patchy attacks on the base begin to die down after 90 minutes of fierce fighting.

4am – The reinforcements from Tripoli take a convoy of vehicles to the CIA base to prepare for evacuation.

4.30am – a fresh round of mortar attacks is launched on the base, killing two U.S. security officers.

5.30 – A heavily armed Libyan military unit arrive at the CIA base to help evacuate the compound of U.S. personnel to the Benghazi airport.

From 6am – Roughly 30 Americans, as well as the bodies of Stevens and the other three Americans killed during the attacks, were loaded on planes and flown out of the city, several U.S. officials said.

Pentagon releases official timeline of Benghazi attack

The Pentagon released Friday an hour-by-hour timeline of the September 11 assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, highlighting when Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and senior commanders were informed of the attack and when decisions were made to move forces to assist. The release comes as the Obama administration is facing increasing questions over its response to the attack.Obama administration continues explanations on Benghazi decision-makingSeptember 11 (Events are listed using the time in Benghazi)

9:42 p.m. — Armed men begin their assault on the U.S. Consulate.

9:59 p.m. — A surveillance drone is directed to fly over the U.S. compound, but it is unarmed.

10:32 p.m. — The Office of the Secretary Defense and the Joint Staff are notified of the attack by the National Military Command Center at the Pentagon. “The information is quickly passed to Secretary Panetta and General Dempsey.”

11 p.m. — Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey meet with President Obama at the White House where they discuss the unfolding situation and how to respond. The meeting had been previously scheduled.

11:10 p.m. — The surveillance drone arrives over the Benghazi facility.

11:30 p.m. — All surviving U.S. personnel are evacuated from the consulate. U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and State Department computer expert Sean Smith were killed in the initial assault.

September 12

Midnight to 2 a.m. — Panetta and other senior leaders discuss possible options for further violence if it were to break out. Panetta gives verbal orders for Marine anti-terrorist teams from Rota, Spain, to prepare to deploy to Tripoli and Benghazi. Panetta also orders a special operations force team training in Croatia and an additional special operations force team in the United States to prepare to deploy to a staging base in southern Italy.

1:30 a.m. — A six-man security team from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli arrives in Benghazi.

2:39 a.m. to 2:53 a.m. — The National Military Command Center gives formal authorization for the deployment of the two special operations force teams from Croatia and the United States.

5:15 a.m. — Attackers launch assault on a second U.S. facility in Benghazi. Two former U.S. Navy SEALs acting as security contractors are killed. They are identified as Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

6:05 a.m. — A C-17 aircraft in Germany is told to prepare to deploy to Libya to evacuate the consulate personnel.

7:40 a.m. — The first wave of Americans are evacuated to Tripoli via airplane.

10 a.m. — A second group, including those killed in the attack, are flown to Tripoli.

2:15 p.m. — The C-17 departs from Germany for the flight to Tripoli.

7:17 p.m. — The C-17 leaves Tripoli with the American consulate personnel and the bodies of Stevens, Smith, Woods and Doherty.

7:57 p.m. — The U.S. special operations force team based in Croatia arrives at a staging base in Italy.

8:56 p.m. — One of the Marine anti-terrorist teams from Spain arrives in Tripoli.

9:28 p.m. — The U.S.-based special operations force team arrives at its staging base in Italy.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/09/world/africa/libya-benghazi-timeline

Former National Security Adiviser Bud McFarlane: For Obama to Do Nothing is Dereliction of Duty

Know The TRUTH ~ Step By Step ~ Bret Baier’s ~ ‘Death and Deceit in Benghazi’

Michelle Malkin SLAMS Media for Trying to Embarrass Mitt Romney for Obama’s Derelection of Duty

Obama Confronted on Benghazi – Stutters Through Response!

Mark Levin – Obama’s “Dereliction of Duty”

Rush military caller says that Obama ordered no response to Benghazi attack

Obama: “let them die, don’t help ambassador”

Michael Coren & John Robson – Benghazi: Obama lied, Americans died

Obama administration knew Benghazi attack was a terror plot

BREAKING OBAMA MAY GO TO PRISON AND BE IMPEACHED KILLING OUR OWN

Michael Savage on New Benghazi Information Uncovered – 10/26/12

Father Of Murdered Navy Seal in Benghazi, Recounts Days After Attack – Judge Jeanine

Top AFRICOM Leader General Carter Ham Was Never Ordered to Save US Men in Be

Reality Check: One question Sec. of State Clinton was not asked about Benghazi

Hillary Clinton, Benghazi “What’s The Difference?” Four Dead Americans

Obama & Hillary On 60 Minutes – Benghazi Gate – Propaganda?, No Questions Ask,

Graham Questions Military Leaders on Response to Benghazi Attack

Part II: Graham Questions Military Leaders on Benghazi

Sen. Chambliss at Benghazi SASC Hearing

Panetta: Benghazi was a ‘problem of distance and time’.

No Word from Hillary During Benghazi Attack Panetta, Dempsey did not speak to Clinton

Panetta Defends Pentagon’s Benghazi Response

Senator Blunt Questions Secretary Panetta, General Dempsey About Benghazi Attacks

Rand Paul’s Reaction To Defense Secretary Panetta’s Benghazi Testimony – Fox News

Obama vs Panetta on Attacks in Benghazi – Obama Could have saved American Lives

Senators challenge military leaders on Benghazi attack response

“…The top two Defense Department officials were sharply challenged by lawmakers Thursday on their insistent claims that nothing more could have been done to save the four Americans who were killed in the Sept. 11 terror attack in Benghazi.

Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey were peppered with questions from Republican senators during a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee. The officials claimed military aircraft and other assets were too far away to get to the scene in time, and suggested armed aircraft like F16s could have done more harm than good in a chaotic situation. The senators, though, pressed the officials for a fuller explanation on why military assets were not deployed to rescue Americans under attack that night — in what will likely be their last chance to question the outgoing Defense secretary.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., disputed testimony that the difficulty in dispatching assets to the scene was “a problem of distance and time.” He suggested the “light footprint” in the region and a failure to respond to threats left the military ill-prepared.

“For you to testify that our posture would not allow a rapid response — our posture was not there because we didn’t take into account the threats to that consulate, and that’s why four Americans died,” he said. “We could have placed forces there. We could have had aircraft and other capacity a short distance away.”

He continued: “No forces arrived there until well after these murders took place.”

Dempsey acknowledged having gotten word of a warning from the U.S. consulate about being unable to withstand a sustained attack, but said the military never got a request for support from the State Department.

“So it’s the State Department’s fault?” McCain asked, curtly.

“I’m not blaming the State Department,” Dempsey said.

McCain responded: “Who would you blame?”

Dempsey went on to claim that several U.S. posts were facing significant threats, though McCain said none so much as Benghazi.

Shortly afterward, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., pressed Panetta again on why no forces were deployed until after the attack was over. Dempsey and Panetta said they talked to President Obama one time that night, but Graham questioned why there weren’t subsequent follow-up conversations.

“It lasted almost eight hours … did the president show any curiosity?” Graham asked.

Panetta said there was “no question” Obama “was concerned about American lives.”

“With all due respect,” Graham responded, “I don’t believe that’s a credible statement if he never called and asked you, ‘are we helping these people?'”

The secretary’s testimony on Benghazi was long-sought by Republican lawmakers. After then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified last month, Graham had demanded that Panetta be brought before the Senate — threatening to hold up the nomination of his prospective replacement Chuck Hagel over the issue.

Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., announced last week that Panetta would testify.

Responding to long-running questions about whether more military assets could have been dispatched to protect those under fire in Libya on Sept. 11, Panetta in his opening statement claimed there simply wasn’t enough time to do more.

“There was not enough time given the speed of the attack for armed military assets to respond,” he said before the Senate Armed Services Committee. “We were not dealing with a prolonged or continuous assault which could have been brought to an end by a U.S. military response. … Time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response.”

Still, he said the Pentagon “spared no effort … to save American lives.”

Panetta was testifying in what may be his final public appearance on Capitol Hill as he prepares to leave the department.

Panetta, in his testimony, detailed the military response on the day and night of the attack.

As Fox News has previously reported, he said an unarmed, unmanned drone was positioned overhead the Benghazi compound.

But he said armed aircraft like AC-130 gunships would have taken too long to get there — “at least nine to 12 hours if not more to deploy.”

“This was, pure and simple … a problem of distance and time,” he said.

Panetta said he also directed that a Marine Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team stationed in Spain prepare to deploy in addition to a second FAST platoon; a special operations force in Central Europe prepare to deploy to a staging base in Southern Europe; and a special ops force in the U.S. similarly prepare to deploy to Southern Europe.

As for what was happening in Libya, he claimed the “quickest response” was the Tripoli-based team of six people which was sent to Benghazi.

“Members of this team, along with others at the annex facility, provided emergency medical assistance and supported the evacuation of all personnel. Only 12 hours after the attacks had begun, all remaining U.S. government personnel had been safely evacuated from Benghazi,” he said.

Since the September assault, some have questioned whether enough was done to protect those at the consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi. Four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, were killed that night.

There have been questions about the perceived delays CIA officials — stationed in Benghazi — encountered that night and their frustration that air support was not sent from nearby Sigonella air base. In recent weeks, Fox News has learned that the rescue unit that left Tripoli was told that air support would be above when they landed in Benghazi, but it wasn’t. …”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/07/panetta-defends-military-response-to-benghazi-attack-at-senate-hearing/#ixzz2KGmLO0Iu

An Incriminating Timeline: Obama Administration and Libya (VIDEO)

The latest incriminating information on the U.S. consulate attack in Benghazi, Libya indicates that the State Department turned down a request for additional security from concerned U.S. embassy staff.

New evidence shows there were security threats in Libya in the months prior to the deadly September 11 attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. Despite these threats, the State Department left its personnel there to fend for themselves.

And when the terrorist attack did take place, the Obama Administration peddled the ridiculous story that an offensive, amateurish, anti-Islam YouTube video was to blame in order to avoid characterizing the murders of four Americans as terrorism.

On October 2, a letter was sent to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R–CA) and Jason Chaffetz (R–UT), Chairman of the National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations Subcommittee. The letter detailed 13 known security threats against U.S. facilities in Libya in the six months prior to September 11.

On October 10, the committee will hold a hearing on events in Libya and seek answers from the State Department. Also on October 10, The Heritage Foundation will host a public panel discussion on the events in Libya titled, “Intelligence and Security Failure: Attacks in Benghazi and Across the Middle East Reveal Ongoing Threat of Terrorism.”

To help our readers follow the path to tragedy on September 11 and its aftermath, below is a chronology of key events:

April 6: IED thrown over the fence of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.

April 11: Gun battle erupts between armed groups two-and-a-half miles from the U.S. Consulate, including rocket-propelled grenades.

April 27: Two South African contractors are kidnapped by armed men, released unharmed.

May 1: Deputy Commander of U.S. Embassy Tripoli’s Local Guard Force is carjacked, beaten, and detained by armed youth.

May 1: British Embassy in Tripoli is attacked by a violent mob and set on fire. Other NATO embassies attacked as well.

May 3: The State Department declines a request from personnel concerned about security at the U.S. Embassy in Libya for a DC-3 plane to take them around the country.

May 22: Two rocket-propelled grenades are fired at the Benghazi office of the International Committee of the Red Cross, less than 1 mile from the U.S. Consulate.

June 6: A large IED destroys part of the security perimeter of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. Creates hole “big enough for 40 men to go through.”

June 10: A car carrying the British ambassador is attacked in Tripoli. Two bodyguards injured.

Late June: The building of the International Red Cross attacked again and closed down, leaving the U.S. flag as the only international one still flying in Benghazi, an obvious target.

August 6: Armed assailants carjack a vehicle with diplomatic plates operated by U.S. personnel.

September 8: A local security officer in Benghazi warns American officials about deteriorating security.

September 11: Protesters attack the U.S. Cairo embassy. U.S. Embassy releases statement and tweets sympathizing with Muslim protesters/attackers.

September 11: U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya is attacked, Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans are killed.

September 12: Secretary Clinton and President Obama issue statements condemning both the video and the attacks.

September 12: U.S. intelligence agencies have enough evidence to conclude a terrorist attack was involved.

September 13: Press Secretary Jay Carney condemns video and violence at a news conference.

September 14: Carney denies Administration had “actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.”

September 14: The bodies of slain Americans return to Andrews Air Force Base. President Obama again blames the YouTube video.

September 16: U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice appears on Sunday talk shows and says the attacks were provoked by the video, exclusively.

September 16: Libyan President Mohamed Magarief says, “no doubt that this [attack] was preplanned, predetermined.”

September 17: State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland refuses to call attacks an act of terror.

September 19: CNN reports having found Ambassador Stevens’s diary, which indicates concern about security threats in Benghazi.

September 19: Director of the National Counterterrorism Center Matthew Olsen tells Congress the attack in Libya was “terrorism.”

September 20: Carney tries to back up Olsen, says it was “self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.”

September 20: Obama refuses to call attack terrorism, citing insufficient information.

September 21: Secretary of State Clinton, at meeting with Pakistani Foreign Minister, says, “What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.”

September 25: On ABC’s “The View,” Obama says, “we don’t have all of the information yet so we are still gathering.”

September 25: To the U.N. assembly, Obama blames “A crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.”

September 26: Libya’s Magarief on the “Today” show says, “It was a preplanned act of terrorism directed against American citizens.”

September 26: Published reports show U.S. Intel agencies and the Obama Administration knew within 24 hours that al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist were involved.

September 27: Innocence of Muslims filmmaker Mark Basseley Youseff (aka Nakoula Basseley Nakoula) is arrested and denied bail on the charges of “probation violation.”

September 28: Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper, Jr., issues a statement backing the Obama Administration’s changing story about the Libyan attack. Says facts are evolving.

October 2: Carney declines to comment on reported requests from diplomats in Libya for additional security, citing the State Department’s internal investigation.

Mistakes were made, Obama lies, people die. What difference does it make?

Chris Stevenssean smith

Killed: Ambassador Christopher Stevens (left) died of smoke inhalation, while agent Sean Smith (right) died in a desperate battle with insurgents

Glen Doherty

tyrone_woodsjpg
Heroic: Former Navy SEALs Glen Doherty (left) and Tyrone Woods (right) were killed in a mortar attack

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 97: Segment 1: The Run On The Fed–Countries Demanding Their Gold Reserves Back–The Currency War Gets Hot–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 96, February 1, 2013: Segment 2: America’s Dilemma: Citizenship or Deportation?–President Barack Obama’s Speech On Illegal Immigration in Las Vegas–January 29, 2013–Videos

Posted on February 1, 2013. Filed under: Business, Communications, Consitutional Law, Crime, Economics, Education, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Government, Government Spending, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Investments, Law, Legal Immigration, Media, Philosophy, Politics, Public Sector Unions, Radio, Regulation, Security, Tax Policy, Unions, Videos, War, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 96: February 1, 2013 

Pronk Pops Show 95: January 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 94: December 7, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 93: November 30, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 92: November 10, 2012

Pronk Pops Show 91: November 5, 2012

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-96

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 2: America’s Dilemma: Citizenship or Deportation? — President Barack Obama’s Speech On Illegal Immigration in Las Vegas — January 29, 2013 — Videos

Obama-Time-to-fix-immigration

President Obama Las Vegas speech on comprehensive immigration reform on Jan. 29

Credit: http://www.upi.com

reagan

FULL SPEECH – US President Obama Immigration Reform from LAS VEGAS 1/29/2013

1984 – Ronald Reagan on Amnesty

Sessions Warns Washington Elites Against Rush To Amnesty

Amnesty – Not the Solution: Talk Border

Immigration: The real Third Rail of politics on TalkBorder

Talk Border: Safe Borders, Not Racism

Immigration by the Numbers — Off the Charts

Immigration, World Poverty and Gumballs – Updated 2010

David Meir-Levi on Talk Border

Martin Sieff on TalkBorder.com

Lou Barletta on Talk Border

Michael Cutler, INS Special Agent

Charles Faddis, CIA (Ret), speaks with Michael Cutler, INS (Ret) on National Security and more in one part of a three-part interview for The United States of Common Sense, hosted by Charles Faddis..

Michael Cutler, a Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, an advisor to the 911 Families for a Secure America, and a consultant, retired in 2002 after a distinguished career with the INS of over 30 years, including 26 as a Special Agent. In 1991, he was promoted to the position of Senior Special Agent and was assigned to the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force and worked with members of other federal and state law enforcement agencies as well as law enforcement organizations of other countries. The task force’s investigations of aliens involved in major drug trafficking organizations ultimately resulted in the seizure of their assets and prosecutions for a wide variety of criminal violations.

Mr. Cutler has testified as an expert witness at nine Congressional hearings on issues relating to the enforcement of immigration laws having been called by members of both political parties. Mr. Cutler also furnished testimony to the Presidential Commission on the Terrorist Attacks of September 11. Mr. Cutler has appeared on numerous television and radio programs including the OReilly Radio Factor, OReillys No Spin Zone, Fox News and the Lou Dobbs Tonight Program on CNN to discuss the enforcement of immigration laws and has participated in various public debates and panel discussions on issues involving the enforcement and administration of immigration laws. Among the areas of concern that he is able to speak about authoritatively are the nexus between immigration and national security, the impact of immigration on the criminal justice system, strategies to combat illegal immigration, and why amnesty for illegal aliens is wrong.

Roy talks about ICE lawsuit with FNC’s Neil Cavuto

The Dangers of Unlimited Legal & Illegal Immigration

Stop Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants – Expert Reveals the True Cost of Amnesty

Path to illegal citizenship: The high cost of Illegal and legal lImmigration for U.S. Citizens

Why Oppose the DREAM Act?

The E-Verify Solution for Illegal Hiring

How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US? – Walsh – 2

How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the United States? Presentation by James H. Walsh, Associate General Counsel of the former INS – part 2.
Census Bureau estimates of the number of illegals in the U.S. are suspect and may represent significant undercounts. The studies presented by these authors show that the numbers of illegal aliens in the U.S. could range from 20 to 38 million.

America’s dilemma: citizenship or deportation?

By Raymond Thomas Pronk

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” – Albert Einstein

President Barack Obama flew to Las Vegas last week to give a speech at a local school outlining his views and principles for comprehensive immigration reform. “Right now, we have 11 million undocumented immigrants in America; 11 million men and women from all over the world who live their lives in the shadows. Yes, they broke the rules. They crossed the border illegally. Maybe they overstayed their visas. Those are facts. Nobody disputes them. But these 11 million men and women are now here,” Obama said.

Why are there more than 11 million illegal aliens in the United States? Simply, the federal government under both Democratic and Republican progressive presidents has refused to vigorously enforce existing immigration law as set forth in federal statutes and regulations and failed to control and secure U.S. borders against a massive invasion of illegal aliens. These presidents betrayed their oath of office to defend and protect the Constitution.

In a debate with Democratic presidential candidate Walter Mondale in 1984, President Ronald Reagan said, “I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though some time back they may have entered illegally.”

On Nov. 6, 1986, Congress enacted the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), also known as the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, to reform immigration law and control the number of illegal immigrants entering the country. Reagan signed the bill.

Under this law approximately three million illegal aliens who had continuously resided in the U.S. before Jan.1, 1982 were granted legal status and eventually citizenship — amnesty for illegal aliens.

Since then the federal government has failed to control and secure the borders and by so doing, the 1986 law by granting amnesty created a strong magnet or incentive for future illegal aliens. Both Reagan and the American people were double-crossed by progressive Democrats and Republicans in Congress who really wanted open borders and unlimited illegal immigration.

The American people are asking for immigration law enforcement and secure borders and not Obama’s comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship. Americans favor limited controlled legal immigration but oppose open borders with unlimited illegal immigration. So-called “undocumented workers” or more accurately illegal aliens should, as required by federal law, be removed from their place of work and deported to their country of origin.

Why? First, aliens broke into the country illegally when they entered the U.S. without a valid visa or over stayed their visas and did not return to the country of origin. Second, aliens broke the law when they either stole identities of U.S. citizens or purchased fraudulent documents such as driver’s licenses and Social Security cards in order to obtain employment in the U.S. Third, aliens broke the law when they worked in the U.S. without having the legal status to do so. Fourth, many employers broke the law when they knowingly hired illegal aliens. You do not reward criminal behavior by granting a pathway to citizenship. The rule of law requires federal government enforcement of immigration law by deporting illegal aliens.

When you multiple these crimes by millions, you are dealing with a crime wave and mass invasion that has been sanctioned by the progressive ruling elites in Washington D.C. from both the Democratic and Republican parties who favor open borders and token enforcement of existing federal immigration law.

Why did these ruling elites ignore the will of the American people? The Democratic Party favors open borders and a pathway to citizenship or amnesty for illegal aliens because they believe the overwhelming majority of these illegal aliens will, when they become citizens, vote for Democratic candidates.

Progressive Republicans likewise favored open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens because many of the businesses that employ illegal aliens also contribute to the campaigns of Republican candidates.

Both political parties could care less that millions of American citizens are unemployed as a direct result of policies that encouraged massive illegal immigration. Staying in power, not the welfare of the American people, was and is the top priority of these politicians.

The 11 million illegal aliens and their dependents should be given the choice to either voluntarily return to their country of origin by a certain date or face deportation under existing federal immigration law. With over 25 million American citizens seeking permanent full time jobs, this would immediately reduce the number of unemployed citizens by millions.

Most Americans would agree with two of Obama’s principles of comprehensive immigration reform namely “to stay focused on enforcement” and “to bring our legal immigration system into the 21st century.” However, most Americans would not agree with Obama to first give the 11 million plus illegal aliens a pathway to citizenship or amnesty for illegal aliens before first controlling and securing the borders and enforcing existing immigration law.

There is a saying in Texas, “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.”

“You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” — Abraham Lincoln

Raymond Thomas Pronk is host of the Pronk Pops Show on KDUX web radio from 3-5 p.m. Fridays and author of the companion blog http://www.pronkpops.wordpress.com/

Background Articles and Videos

Opinion: Will Obama Poison Immigration Reform?

Reagan on immingration 2

Numbers USA – Immigration By the Numbers – Part 1

Numbers USA – Immigration By the Numbers – Part 2 of 2

E-Verify: Employment Verification

How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US? – Walsh – 1

How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US? – Walsh – 2

How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the United States? Presentation by James H. Walsh, Associate General Counsel of the former INS – part 2.

Census Bureau estimates of the number of illegals in the U.S. are suspect and may represent significant undercounts. The studies presented by these authors show that the numbers of illegal aliens in the U.S. could range from 20 to 38 million.

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
______________________
For Immediate Release January 29, 2013
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
ON COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM
Del Sol High School
Las Vegas, Nevada

11:40 A.M. PST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you! (Applause.) Thank you! Thank you so much. (Applause.) It is good to be back in Las Vegas! (Applause.) And it is good to be among so many good friends.

Let me start off by thanking everybody at Del Sol High School for hosting us. (Applause.) Go Dragons! Let me especially thank your outstanding principal, Lisa Primas. (Applause.)

There are all kinds of notable guests here, but I just want to mention a few. First of all, our outstanding Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, is here. (Applause.) Our wonderful Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar. (Applause.) Former Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis. (Applause.) Two of the outstanding members of the congressional delegation from Nevada, Steve Horsford and Dina Titus. (Applause.) Your own mayor, Carolyn Goodman. (Applause.)

But we also have some mayors that flew in because they know how important the issue we’re going to talk about today is. Marie Lopez Rogers from Avondale, Arizona. (Applause.) Kasim Reed from Atlanta, Georgia. (Applause.) Greg Stanton from Phoenix, Arizona. (Applause.) And Ashley Swearengin from Fresno, California. (Applause.)

And all of you are here, as well as some of the top labor leaders in the country. And we are just so grateful. Some outstanding business leaders are here as well. And of course, we’ve got wonderful students here, so I could not be prouder of our students. (Applause.)

Now, those of you have a seat, feel free to take a seat. I don’t mind.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: I love you, Mr. President!

THE PRESIDENT: I love you back. (Applause.)

Now, last week, I had the honor of being sworn in for a second term as President of the United States. (Applause.) And during my inaugural address, I talked about how making progress on the defining challenges of our time doesn’t require us to settle every debate or ignore every difference that we may have, but it does require us to find common ground and move forward in common purpose. It requires us to act.

I know that some issues will be harder to lift than others. Some debates will be more contentious. That’s to be expected. But the reason I came here today is because of a challenge where the differences are dwindling; where a broad consensus is emerging; and where a call for action can now be heard coming from all across America. I’m here today because the time has come for common-sense, comprehensive immigration reform. (Applause.) The time is now. Now is the time. Now is the time. Now is the time.

AUDIENCE: Sí se puede! Sí se puede!

THE PRESIDENT: Now is the time.

I’m here because most Americans agree that it’s time to fix a system that’s been broken for way too long. I’m here because business leaders, faith leaders, labor leaders, law enforcement, and leaders from both parties are coming together to say now is the time to find a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful immigrants who still see America as the land of opportunity. Now is the time to do this so we can strengthen our economy and strengthen our country’s future.

Think about it — we define ourselves as a nation of immigrants. That’s who we are — in our bones. The promise we see in those who come here from every corner of the globe, that’s always been one of our greatest strengths. It keeps our workforce young. It keeps our country on the cutting edge. And it’s helped build the greatest economic engine the world has ever known.

After all, immigrants helped start businesses like Google and Yahoo!. They created entire new industries that, in turn, created new jobs and new prosperity for our citizens. In recent years, one in four high-tech startups in America were founded by immigrants. One in four new small business owners were immigrants, including right here in Nevada — folks who came here seeking opportunity and now want to share that opportunity with other Americans.

But we all know that today, we have an immigration system that’s out of date and badly broken; a system that’s holding us back instead of helping us grow our economy and strengthen our middle class.

Right now, we have 11 million undocumented immigrants in America; 11 million men and women from all over the world who live their lives in the shadows. Yes, they broke the rules. They crossed the border illegally. Maybe they overstayed their visas. Those are facts. Nobody disputes them. But these 11 million men and women are now here. Many of them have been here for years. And the overwhelming majority of these individuals aren’t looking for any trouble. They’re contributing members of the community. They’re looking out for their families. They’re looking out for their neighbors. They’re woven into the fabric of our lives.

Every day, like the rest of us, they go out and try to earn a living. Often they do that in a shadow economy — a place where employers may offer them less than the minimum wage or make them work overtime without extra pay. And when that happens, it’s not just bad for them, it’s bad for the entire economy. Because all the businesses that are trying to do the right thing — that are hiring people legally, paying a decent wage, following the rules — they’re the ones who suffer. They’ve got to compete against companies that are breaking the rules. And the wages and working conditions of American workers are threatened, too.

So if we’re truly committed to strengthening our middle class and providing more ladders of opportunity to those who are willing to work hard to make it into the middle class, we’ve got to fix the system.

We have to make sure that every business and every worker in America is playing by the same set of rules. We have to bring this shadow economy into the light so that everybody is held accountable — businesses for who they hire, and immigrants for getting on the right side of the law. That’s common sense. And that’s why we need comprehensive immigration reform. (Applause.)

There’s another economic reason why we need reform. It’s not just about the folks who come here illegally and have the effect they have on our economy. It’s also about the folks who try to come here legally but have a hard time doing so, and the effect that has on our economy.

Right now, there are brilliant students from all over the world sitting in classrooms at our top universities. They’re earning degrees in the fields of the future, like engineering and computer science. But once they finish school, once they earn that diploma, there’s a good chance they’ll have to leave our country. Think about that.

Intel was started with the help of an immigrant who studied here and then stayed here. Instagram was started with the help of an immigrant who studied here and then stayed here. Right now in one of those classrooms, there’s a student wrestling with how to turn their big idea — their Intel or Instagram — into a big business. We’re giving them all the skills they need to figure that out, but then we’re going to turn around and tell them to start that business and create those jobs in China or India or Mexico or someplace else? That’s not how you grow new industries in America. That’s how you give new industries to our competitors. That’s why we need comprehensive immigration reform. (Applause.)

Now, during my first term, we took steps to try and patch up some of the worst cracks in the system.

First, we strengthened security at the borders so that we could finally stem the tide of illegal immigrants. We put more boots on the ground on the southern border than at any time in our history. And today, illegal crossings are down nearly 80 percent from their peak in 2000. (Applause.)

Second, we focused our enforcement efforts on criminals who are here illegally and who endanger our communities. And today, deportations of criminals is at its highest level ever. (Applause.)

And third, we took up the cause of the DREAMers — (applause) — the young people who were brought to this country as children, young people who have grown up here, built their lives here, have futures here. We said that if you’re able to meet some basic criteria like pursuing an education, then we’ll consider offering you the chance to come out of the shadows so that you can live here and work here legally, so that you can finally have the dignity of knowing you belong.

But because this change isn’t permanent, we need Congress to act — and not just on the DREAM Act. We need Congress to act on a comprehensive approach that finally deals with the 11 million undocumented immigrants who are in the country right now. That’s what we need. (Applause.)

Now, the good news is that for the first time in many years, Republicans and Democrats seem ready to tackle this problem together. (Applause.) Members of both parties, in both chambers, are actively working on a solution. Yesterday, a bipartisan group of senators announced their principles for comprehensive immigration reform, which are very much in line with the principles I’ve proposed and campaigned on for the last few years. So at this moment, it looks like there’s a genuine desire to get this done soon, and that’s very encouraging.

But this time, action must follow. (Applause.) We can’t allow immigration reform to get bogged down in an endless debate. We’ve been debating this a very long time. So it’s not as if we don’t know technically what needs to get done. As a consequence, to help move this process along, today I’m laying out my ideas for immigration reform. And my hope is that this provides some key markers to members of Congress as they craft a bill, because the ideas I’m proposing have traditionally been supported by both Democrats like Ted Kennedy and Republicans like President George W. Bush. You don’t get that matchup very often. (Laughter.) So we know where the consensus should be.

Now, of course, there will be rigorous debate about many of the details, and every stakeholder should engage in real give and take in the process. But it’s important for us to recognize that the foundation for bipartisan action is already in place. And if Congress is unable to move forward in a timely fashion, I will send up a bill based on my proposal and insist that they vote on it right away. (Applause.)

So the principles are pretty straightforward. There are a lot of details behind it. We’re going to hand out a bunch of paper so that everybody will know exactly what we’re talking about. But the principles are pretty straightforward.

First, I believe we need to stay focused on enforcement. That means continuing to strengthen security at our borders. It means cracking down more forcefully on businesses that knowingly hire undocumented workers. To be fair, most businesses want to do the right thing, but a lot of them have a hard time figuring out who’s here legally, who’s not. So we need to implement a national system that allows businesses to quickly and accurately verify someone’s employment status. And if they still knowingly hire undocumented workers, then we need to ramp up the penalties.

Second, we have to deal with the 11 million individuals who are here illegally. We all agree that these men and women should have to earn their way to citizenship. But for comprehensive immigration reform to work, it must be clear from the outset that there is a pathway to citizenship. (Applause.)

We’ve got to lay out a path — a process that includes passing a background check, paying taxes, paying a penalty, learning English, and then going to the back of the line, behind all the folks who are trying to come here legally. That’s only fair, right? (Applause.)

So that means it won’t be a quick process but it will be a fair process. And it will lift these individuals out of the shadows and give them a chance to earn their way to a green card and eventually to citizenship. (Applause.)

And the third principle is we’ve got to bring our legal immigration system into the 21st century because it no longer reflects the realities of our time. (Applause.) For example, if you are a citizen, you shouldn’t have to wait years before your family is able to join you in America. You shouldn’t have to wait years. (Applause.)

If you’re a foreign student who wants to pursue a career in science or technology, or a foreign entrepreneur who wants to start a business with the backing of American investors, we should help you do that here. Because if you succeed, you’ll create American businesses and American jobs. You’ll help us grow our economy. You’ll help us strengthen our middle class.

So that’s what comprehensive immigration reform looks like: smarter enforcement; a pathway to earned citizenship; improvements in the legal immigration system so that we continue to be a magnet for the best and the brightest all around the world. It’s pretty straightforward.

The question now is simple: Do we have the resolve as a people, as a country, as a government to finally put this issue behind us? I believe that we do. I believe that we do. (Applause.) I believe we are finally at a moment where comprehensive immigration reform is within our grasp.

But I promise you this: The closer we get, the more emotional this debate is going to become. Immigration has always been an issue that enflames passions. That’s not surprising. There are few things that are more important to us as a society than who gets to come here and call our country home; who gets the privilege of becoming a citizen of the United States of America. That’s a big deal.

When we talk about that in the abstract, it’s easy sometimes for the discussion to take on a feeling of “us” versus “them.” And when that happens, a lot of folks forget that most of “us” used to be “them.” We forget that. (Applause.)

It’s really important for us to remember our history. Unless you’re one of the first Americans, a Native American, you came from someplace else. Somebody brought you. (Applause.)

Ken Salazar, he’s of Mexican American descent, but he points that his family has been living where he lives for 400 years, so he didn’t immigrate anywhere. (Laughter.)

The Irish who left behind a land of famine. The Germans who fled persecution. The Scandinavians who arrived eager to pioneer out west. The Polish. The Russians. The Italians. The Chinese. The Japanese. The West Indians. The huddled masses who came through Ellis Island on one coast and Angel Island on the other. (Applause.) All those folks, before they were “us,” they were “them.”

And when each new wave of immigrants arrived, they faced resistance from those who were already here. They faced hardship. They faced racism. They faced ridicule. But over time, as they went about their daily lives, as they earned a living, as they raised a family, as they built a community, as their kids went to school here, they did their part to build a nation.

They were the Einsteins and the Carnegies. But they were also the millions of women and men whose names history may not remember, but whose actions helped make us who we are; who built this country hand by hand, brick by brick. (Applause.) They all came here knowing that what makes somebody an American is not just blood or birth, but allegiance to our founding principles and the faith in the idea that anyone from anywhere can write the next great chapter of our story.

And that’s still true today. Just ask Alan Aleman. Alan is here this afternoon — where is Alan? He’s around here — there he is right here. (Applause.) Alan was born in Mexico. (Applause.) He was brought to this country by his parents when he was a child. Growing up, Alan went to an American school, pledged allegiance to the American flag, felt American in every way — and he was, except for one: on paper.

In high school, Alan watched his friends come of age — driving around town with their new licenses, earning some extra cash from their summer jobs at the mall. He knew he couldn’t do those things. But it didn’t matter that much. What mattered to Alan was earning an education so that he could live up to his God-given potential.

Last year, when Alan heard the news that we were going to offer a chance for folks like him to emerge from the shadows — even if it’s just for two years at a time — he was one of the first to sign up. And a few months ago he was one of the first people in Nevada to get approved. (Applause.) In that moment, Alan said, “I felt the fear vanish. I felt accepted.”

So today, Alan is in his second year at the College of Southern Nevada. (Applause.) Alan is studying to become a doctor. (Applause.) He hopes to join the Air Force. He’s working hard every single day to build a better life for himself and his family. And all he wants is the opportunity to do his part to build a better America. (Applause.)

So in the coming weeks, as the idea of reform becomes more real and the debate becomes more heated, and there are folks who are trying to pull this thing apart, remember Alan and all those who share the same hopes and the same dreams. Remember that this is not just a debate about policy. It’s about people. It’s about men and women and young people who want nothing more than the chance to earn their way into the American story.

Throughout our history, that has only made our nation stronger. And it’s how we will make sure that this century is the same as the last: an American century welcoming of everybody who aspires to do something more, and who is willing to work hard to do it, and is willing to pledge that allegiance to our flag.

Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

END 12:05 P.M. PST

Illegal Immigration Polls & Surveys

See How Americans Feeel About Illegal Immigration

Public Opinion Polling on Illegal Immigration
A super majority of Americans support immigration enforcement and oppose Amnesty according to countless polls and surveys about illegal immigration. Unfortunately, the pro-Amnesty lobby is circulating a few politicized polls that claim the opposite.
Here you can see for yourself how Americans truly feel about illegal immigration. It is clear that Americans want enforcement, instead of Amnesty for illegal immigrants. Please check back often for updates and feel free to use these polls and surveys about illegal immigration in your letters to Congress, letters to candidates and campaigns, letters to the editor, books, articles, talk radio shows, and online posts!
Please know when you speak out for immigration enforcement or against illegal immigration and amnesty, you are speaking for the true majority of America’s legal citizens of every race and political party.

POLLS AND SURVEYSSeventy-eight percent (78%) of likely voters were opposed to legalizing the status of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. with only 19% supporting it. 88% of African-Americans were opposed to legalization. Pulse Opinion Research, LLC, September, 2009
71% of Americans want to see the bosses who hire illegal immigrants arrested while 64 percent support police conducting surprise raids on businesses suspected of hiring illegal immigrants (The Raids Obama has stopped) Rasmussen Reports poll, October, 2009.
80 percent of U.S. voters oppose proposals for government-backed health-care plans for illegal immigrants Rasmussen Reports poll, June, 2009.
78 percent of Americans believe that high immigration numbers have had a negative impact on the cost and quality of the nation’s health care system and 78% of likely voters were opposed to legalizing the status of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. American Council for Immigration Reform, September, 2009
73% of Americans called for a drop in the number of illegal immigrants CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, October, 2009.
58% of Arizona voters say the policies and activities of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio have had a positive impact on the state’s image, [May 2009, Rasmussen Reports]
74% of Americans think the government is not doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into this country, [Washington Post-ABC News poll, April 2009]
66% of likely voters nationwide say it is Very Important for the government to improve its enforcement of the borders and reduce illegal immigration, [April 2009, Rasmussen Reports]
73% of U.S. voters believe that a police officer should automatically check to see if someone is in this country legally when the officer pulls that person over for a traffic violation, [March 2009, Rasmussen Reports]
67% of voters also say that if law enforcement officers know of places where immigrants gather to find work, they should sometimes conduct surprise raids to identify and deport illegal immigrants,[March 2009, Rasmussen Reports]
68% of Arizona voters have a favorable view of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, [March 2009, Rasmussen Reports]
68% of U.S. voters favor strict government sanctions on employers who hire illegal immigrants, [March 2009, Rasmussen Reports]
62% of New Jersey Residents oppose offering illegal immigrants some type of driver’s licenses. Just 33% favor this proposal, [March 2009, Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey Poll]
Only 20% of New Jersey residents favor extending in-state college tuition rates to undocumented immigrants living in the state compared to 37% who say illegal immigrants should pay higher out-of-state rates. 39% say that illegal immigrants should not even be allowed to attend New Jersey’s public colleges and universities at all, [March 2009, Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey Poll]
78% of registered Utah voters want to see SB81 implemented. The bill would, among other provisions, require all companies that contract with the state to check the immigration status of their employees and allow local police to enforce immigration law, [January 2009, The Salt Lake Tribune]
74% of U.S. voters continue to believe the federal government is not doing enough to secure the country’s borders, [December 2008, Rasmussen Reports]
63% of voters say gaining control of the border is more important than legalizing the status of undocumented workers in the country, [December 2008, Rasmussen Reports]
Only 32% of Obama voters considered his support for amnesty as a factor in their decisions to vote for him. 67% said it was either not a factor at all, or they voted for Obama in spite of his stance on amnesty, [November 2008, Zogby Interactive Survey of Likely Voters]
60% of voters said reducing illegal immigration and cracking down on employers who hire them is important to them, while only 21% supported “legalizing or creating a pathway to citizenship” for illegal aliens, [November 2008, Zogby Interactive Survey of Likely Voters]
Transatlantic Trends: when asked about what governments should do to address illegal immigration, 83% of respondents supported stronger border controls, 74% supported cracking down on employers, and 68% supported deportation, [November 2008, TNS Opinion]
71.5% of likely voters said they agree (including 47.8% who strongly agree) that local law enforcement officers should enforce federal immigration laws, including 51.5% of Hispanics and 56.2% of self-described “liberals.” [October 2008, Judicial Watch/Zogby International]
57.1% of likely voters said more law enforcement is needed to address the issue of illegal immigration while only 7.1% said they believe less law enforcement should be used. 34.7% of Hispanics support more law enforcement while 15.5% said less, [October 2008, Judicial Watch/ Zogby International]
69% of voters say controlling the border is more important than legalizing the status of undocumented workers, while just 21% think legalization is more important, [August 2008, Rasmussen Reports]
Ohio voters prefer strict enforcement over integration of illegal immigrants 71 – 20 % and 22% say they would vote against a candidate who disagrees with them only on the immigration issue, [December 2007, Quinnipiac University poll]
77% of American voters say companies should be allowed to require employees to speak English while on the job, [November 2007, Rasmussen Reports]
77% of American adults are opposed to making drivers licenses available to people who are in the country illegally, [November 2007, Rasmussen Reports]
Only 22% of voters support the Dream Act proposal introduced by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and 59% of all voters oppose the Dream Act concept, [October 2007, Rasmussen Reports]
68% of North Carolinians disagree (including 41.6% who strongly disagree) with proposals that would allow undocumented immigrants to stay in this country for several years as long as they have a job, [September 2007, Elon University Poll]
58% of voters nationwide favor cutting off federal funds for “sanctuary cities” that offer protection to illegal immigrants, [August 2007, Rasmussen Reports]
79% of American adults favor a proposal requiring employers to fire workers who falsify identity documents, [August 2007, Rasmussen Reports]
Just 22% of American voters currently favor the “comprehensive” immigration reform bill in the U.S. Senate despite a despite a massive White House effort, [June 2007, Rasmussen Reports]
2007 Senate amnesty bill: just 16% of American voters believe illegal immigration will decline if the bill is passed. If voters had a chance to improve the legislation, 75% would make changes to increase border security measures and reduce illegal immigration and just 19% would make it easier for illegal immigrants to stay in the country and eventually become citizens, [May 2007, Rasmussen Reports]
When presented by itself, 79% of likely voters supported reducing the illegal immigrant population by increasing border enforcement, penalizing employers, and increasing cooperation with local law enforcement, while 15 percent were opposed. No other proposal had near this level of support, [May 2007, Pulse Opinion Research]
Which approach do you prefer – enforcing the law and cause illegal immigrants to go home over time or granting legal status and citizenship to those who meet certain requirements? 56% prefer “Enforce the law” while 35% prefer “Grant legal status.” [May 2007, Pulse Opinion Research]
58% of likely voters prefer that the 12 million illegal immigrants in the country go home as opposed to 30% who prefer they be allowed to stay legally, [May 2007, Pulse Opinion Research]
59% of Americans believe the more effective way to deal with the potential treat to national security posed by millions of illegal immigrants living within the United States is to crack down on illegal immigration by toughening the enforcement of existing laws, deporting illegal immigrants and prosecuting the employers who illegally employ workers, [April 2007, UPI/Zogby Poll]
61% of likely American voters oppose providing a path to US citizenship for those illegal immigrants who entered the United States illegally, and who fraudulently obtained green cards and Social Security numbers, when millions are playing by the rules and waiting in their countries to enter the United States legally, [April 2007, McLaughlin & Associates Poll]
A poll of likely voters, using neutral language, found that Americans prefer the House of Representatives’ enforcement-only bill by 2-1 over Senate proposals to legalize illegal immigrants and greatly increase legal immigration, [April 2006, Zogby America]

http://www.endillegalimmigration.com/illegal_immigration_polls_surveys/index.shtml

Related Posts On Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 96, February 1, 2013: Segment 0: The Coming Obama Recession–Unemployment Up–Negative Growth in Real Gross Domestic Product–Videos

Pronk Pops Show 96, February 1, 2013: Segment 1: The Shrinking Economy, Real GDP in Fourth Quarter Falls By More Than 3%–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

« Previous Entries

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...