Saturday, July 31, 2010

Congratulations to Chelsea Clinton

She ties the knot, which not everyone is bothering to do these days. Her wedding photos are up.....

Obama Cook Out

POW Radio: The Arizona Ruling and The Ruling Class

Mark analyzes the strike-down of Arizona's law on illegal immigration in terms of Ruling Class vs. Country Class. Also, when did FOX news start attacking people for attacking Obama? Since former Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo stepped out of the boundaries set by the Ruling Class for serf involvement in "their" government.

Catch the 30 min. audio here.

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Green Candidate's Senate Platform Makes Yahoo

The Green Party has a candidate for Senate, Greenland Mayor John Gray. And I agree with what I hear of his platform in this Yahoo news feed.

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Analysis of the Arizona Immigration Law Ruling

High Federal Overlord Judge Susan Bolton, if this photo gives you any hint of where I am going with this...


Have I read Bolton's ruling? Nope. So how can I analyze it for you? Easy, these people are so predictable that all I have to hear is a brief on AFR about it, and I know where this is going. If I were Rush Limbaugh I would claim that this is just a result of how amazingly smart I am. Since I am me, and such a claim would be ridiculous, I will just tell you they are so predictable that once you realize and apply a few basic principles then anyone with a few brain cells to rub together can cut right to the heart of these decisions. Here are a few....

1) Ruling class members like Susan Bolton are going to side with illegal aliens over the Country Class. Since the ruling class typically lives in gated communities in up-scale parts of town, and often send their children to the best schools, they are not in the least alarmed by the transformation of much of middle America into a third world slum by swarms of illegal aliens. In general these illegal aliens want to enjoy the advantages of a clean, prosperous, law abiding society, but bring with them the attitudes, values, and habits which produced the very conditions of their homelands. But many of them do bring with them cultural traits which the ruling class finds desirable- they are good at kow-towing to those with the power. Regular Americans, unused to oppression and living in fear, are too uppity for their liking. They prefer serfs who know who their "betters" are. Even if they know it because of a long history of being oppressed by those "betters". The average Country class person is not there- yet.

2) The actual text of the Constitution, or any other law be it from God or from Man, means absolutely nothing to the Ruling class. Sometimes this contempt of the rule of law is open, like when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi answered "Are you kidding?" when asked where in the Constitution was Congress given the authority to force Americans to purchase health insurance. This does not mean they don't claim the mantle of "the Constitution" as a propaganda ploy. Since the Ruling Class does not believe in absolute truth, then in a sense everything is a lie. For those who hold to such thinking what matters is saying whatever needs to be said to placate the serfs until a sufficient number of chains can be forged to fetter them all.

An example of this latter approach can be found in "Justice" Department Spokesperson Hannah August's statement that "States can and do play a role in cooperating with the federal government in its enforcement of the immigration laws, but they must do so within our constitutional framework," Yet a look at the actual text of the Constitution shows that it does not give the Federal government complete control of immigration. The role of the states in immigration is not limited to "cooperating with the federal government in is enforcement of immigration law." Far from it.

The actual text says basically that the states had TOTAL control over immigration for the first 30 years of the republic, except that the Feds could put a $10 tax per person on immigrants. And after 1807? It implies that the Feds can ban "the immigration or exportation of persons into the United States", but that's all the authority that Congress is given on immigration, except that Congress can develop a uniform standard for naturalization of those who want to become citizens. That power does not apply to a debate about who has enforcement power over aliens that both a state and the federal government say are here illegally.

Nowhere- nowhere- does it ever even imply that states lose any authority to make their own or additional rules about who can come into their state from outside the United States. Read it for yourself, in particular article one section nine. It's not very long or hard to understand. Judges like Bolton get the Constitution wrong not because it is beyond their intellect, but because it is beneath their contempt.

3) In disputes between the Federal Government and a State Government, there is no "unbiased referee." In particular Federal Government employees known as "Federal Judges" are not unbiased referees. The contention that these federal employees should be the sole and final arbiter of the limits of federal power over the states is too absurd a position to bother refuting, except for the fact that it is the position of the ruling class. With few exceptions, federal judges are going to rule in ways that favor the branch which signs their pay checks. What could be more obviously true?

Some advocates for the Rule of Law say that the defeat was not so bad as one might think for two reasons. One is that law enforcement can still ask for proof of immigration status, they simply are not allowed to be mandated to ask for such proof. Fair enough. But they also count it a victory that the judge upheld the portion that allowed citizens to sue so-called "Sanctuary Cities" which make no effort to help the Feds with their near-sham immigration law enforcement "efforts".

In the larger picture of shaking off the fetters of the Ruling class, even this part of the decision was a defeat, because all it allowed the state to do was go after cities who had a policy of non-cooperation with the Federal government. In other words, the judge said states have the freedom to help back up the federal government's control, but not the reverse. Ten years from now, I may have to live in a "Sanctuary City" for bloggers who run afoul of new federal laws against "hate speech" on the internet, formerly know as "free speech." Perhaps I will be labeled a "potential domestic terrorist" for writing that the craven idiots who are destroying our country are craven idiots who are destroying our country. In such a case, I hope there are cities that are "sanctuary cities" from coast to coast where local officials make it a policy to refuse to help D.C. do any of its dirty work.

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Abortion Clinic in Fayetteville to Close its Doors

Dr. Bill "The Butcher" Harrison is shutting down his Fayetteville abortion clinic. It's the only one in the area. Apparently, its for health reasons.

By all accounts Harrison has himself convinced that he was doing good work by operating his clinic. Before too many more days go by, I suspect he will be standing before the Judge of All The Earth. You think He will buy Harrison's rationalizations? Does it seem warm in here to you?

Sunday, July 25, 2010

State GOP Convention Revisited

The State GOP Convention is over. The big controversy was the acceptance of the party platform. The leadership moved to accept the platform without giving the delegates a chance to read it. Motions like that required a 2/3rds majority, but it was the leadership who was counting the votes. One eyewitness tweeted that he was not sure that Chairman Doyle Webb really had the 2/3rds vote required to accept the platform without debate. Still, Webb considered that the motion carried.

An astute delegate then advanced a motion to reconsider the previous motion, which only needed a majority to pass. It did, and they went through the platform line by line. Webb gave all views a chance to be heard from that point forward.

The result was some changes to the platform that were beneficial to groups like Secure Arkansas. The platform was strengthened on illegal immigration. Apparently, the strong language on illegals was left out of the platform as presented, but the delegates put it in.

As I read it, I find some, but not much, to disagree with. Heck, I've always liked a lot of the GOP platform- it's the way that most of their elected officials do the opposite once in office that bothers me.

In this one though, I detected a schizo tendency to want to limit government on one hand, and call for support of a government program to solve a host of private sector problems on the other. Being for lower taxes and spending while also being for expensive government programs to solve everyone’s problems is like being for a free lunch. I’d be for a free lunch too, if such a thing really existed. Adults know that it does not, somebody always pays. Without naming specific areas of state government that are overfunded, talking about lowering taxes and spending is just free lunch talk. Republicans of late have a tendency to keep spending and use debt to buy your “free” lunch, which is the same as having you kid pay for your “free” lunch.

I did not care for the elimination of the state income tax in favor of adding to the already too high state sales tax. Try selling big-ticket items for a living, as I do, and see how that works out. People can go across any state border- or the internet, and not get savaged by sales taxes like we do. It's a commerce-killer.

I was also shocked to read that they consider the political contribution tax credit "unethical" and perhaps even "immoral". That is the one on your state income tax where you can get a $50 per person tax credit for contributions to candidates for state office.

I view it as a great equalizer for the common citizen who wants to give for the best of motives. I guess that some in the state GOP don’t like it. Are they going to ask their candidates to not take any donations from the credit? I mean, if it’s unethical and all, they should not be taking it, right?

Also, since the basis of their objection is that they don’t like tax money being spent for political purposes, I presume they are going to come out against further taxpayer support for their national conventions, as well as tax payer support of party primaries. A lot of folks who believe we need a third party would like it if the Republicans and Democrats stopped taking taxpayer money to fund their operations, but I would not hold my breath waiting for it to happen.

Saturday, July 24, 2010

Ruling Class Congressman Disses His Serfs

Unbelievable. The guy is a pig in trousers! These guys know they are untouchable because they have tons of big corporate and pro-illegal dollars. They can use that to run commercials telling the average voter what great people they are, but the few who meet them in person get the truth.

Friday, July 23, 2010

Patriots on Watch: The Ruling Class and Ideals

Catch the 30 minute audio here.

Mark comments on the American Spectator article that Rush Limbaugh spent two hours reading on Monday. That leads right into pressure from the "ruling class" of both sides to abandon ideology. Also, Jefferson said that men are drawn by their very constitutions into two types of ideological parties. What are they and who is right?

The Wisdom of Brummett on Structure of Government

I have not commented on the controversy surrounding state officials use of state vehicles for personal business, mainly because Jason Tolbert summed it up nicely (and in the manner of a man who is not "in the tank") at the Tolbert Report.

As an accountant, Tolbert knows more about what the expectations are than I would, so I will remain silent when someone more knowledgeable than I has spoken. OTOH, John Brummett has also written on the issue. Like most members of the population, I am much more knowledgeable than he, especially once you subtract out all of the things that he thinks he "knows" that are not true.

In his recent article on "Boys and Their Cars" Columnist John Brummett closes with the following: "My position is that all these constitutional offices except governor, and maybe attorney general, ought to be abolished as statewide elected positions. They are clerical, custodial, antiquated and otherwise pointless.

The secretary of state, for example, might need a riding lawnmower, but that’s about all."

Well, he's wrong. The folks who wrote our state constitution were wise indeed to divide up the power of the executive branch. They had suffered under strong executives and knew the tendency of power to centralize. Even with the Arkansas Governorship being weak on paper, Gov. Mike Beebe has still managed to dominate the legislature and basically call the shots for them. Just think how much he would dominate the ledge if he had the power and the perks of the other offices under his control.

The Secretary of State, contrary to Brummett's bloviationing, should indeed be a separate office from the Governor. It may well be a custodial rather than policy making office, but how would you like being a state legislator challenging a Governor who could not only do all the things that Beebe can now do to you, but controlled your working and living quarters as well? He would also control all of the staff that you would utilize when crafting legislation.

Add to it that the Secretary of State oversees elections. Should the Governor who wants to make policy be in charge of counting the votes there or should it be entrusted to a custodian? Clearly the integrity of the process is better served when a separate, non-policy person, is conducting the election. And add to that the petitioning process is validated by the SOS. There is a decent chance that Charlie Daniels and company did not give Secure Arkansas a fair shake during the recent hoopla on their petition. The solution is not to combine the SOS with the Governor, but to elect an SOS who is more independent of the Governor than Daniels.

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

KARK Tea Party Smear Job

Ken Wallis from the Examiner details the smear job KARK did on the Arkansas Tea Parties. Basically ran a story about how white supremacist Billy Roper was a Tea Partier. In his own mind maybe, but none of the active groups claim him.

Patriots on Watch: Hijacking in progress

Catch the 30 minute audio file here.

"Ron Paul vs. Clinton Webb. Thomas Jefferson on the two natural political parties. The lesser of two evils in Louisiana. J. B. Williams on how the Tea Parties have been hijacked, with what you can do about it thrown in by Mark for no extra charge. We don't even get enough time to properly discuss the American Spectator article."

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Why Is Beebe Losing Ground?

Roby Brock has a new poll out. To me the biggest stunner was the Governor's race. All of a sudden Bebee's lead is down to single digits- 49.5% to 40.5%. A month ago, this race was 62%-19% Bebee!

What happened? Brock says without polling, we can only speculate. He speculates that the mis-use of state vehicles is costing Bebee support because that is one of the few things that has changed in the last month. Maybe, but Bebee was on the right side of that issue, it is McDaniel and Shoffner who were the big offenders. Maybe it has gone under the radar in some circles, but I would say that his refusal to take action on illegal immigration is at least as big a factor.

Sec. of State Daniels rejected the Secure Arkansas petition on illegal immigration under some dubious circumstances and refused to validate the signatures per the Constitution and Arkansas Law. Bebee shrugged his shoulders and feigned helplessness over both the petition and illegal immigration as a whole. Basically, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer and Secure Arkansas are providing the platform for Bebee to make himself look bad.

Monday, July 19, 2010

Health Care- The Private Option

Ron Paul introduces a bill that will end-run Obamacare.

I don't care for the part about the feds seizing control over who can sell health insurance within a state, but everything else about it is way better than what we have now.

Voting With Their Feet

Black Line represent In-migration, red lines represnt out-migration for Harris County Texas. The interactive map is here if you want to play. Pulaski county did not do so well, Benton County did.

The Enterprise Blog has featured an occasional series comparing Texas and California as a way to draw conclusions about America as a whole. Previous posts are here, here, here, here, here, and here.

Texas’s low-cost, liberty-loving atmosphere has become an attractive alternative to California’s oppressive public sector and dysfunctional policy environment. No amount of heart-melting vistas, celebrity sightings, or traipses through wine country can make up for what almost appears a strategic attempt by one of the nation’s largest states to drive businesses and productive people away.......excerpt, get the full article here.

Sunday, July 18, 2010

Melt Value

Recently I have written a good bit about how the government is soon going to destroy the dollar. They may not want it destroyed, but their actions will guarantee it. Siphoning value out of a currency through inflation is a hidden tax increase. They get to spend money, without angering you by taking any of your dollars in taxes. Instead of taking the dollars, they simply siphon the value out of those dollars. This sneaky maneuver leaves you with the same amount of dollars, but those dollars won’t buy as much. The difference in value is in new money that they created. They spend this new money on what they want, the same as if they took it from you in taxes.

The fact is the government has been siphoning off the earnings of the population this way since at least 1913, the year they created the so-called Federal Reserve System. Since that time, the dollar has lost over 95% of its purchasing power. This process has accelerated since 1971, the last year the dollar had even a thin connection to a gold standard. Tying a currency to a fixed amount of gold, silver, or other commodity is a way to protect people who earn a living in that currency from politicians who pull such tricks. That’s why big-spending politicians and the media which enable them hate the idea of a defined currency. It holds them accountable, prevents these hidden tax increases, and forces them to govern more responsibly.

There is now no definition for what the value of a dollar is. At one time, a dollar was defined as 1/20th of an ounce of gold. Twenty dollars purchased one ounce of gold. Less than a century later, it takes $1,200 to buy an ounce of gold. The gold in the dollar from that period would today be worth about $60 today.

A silver dollar was originally introduced as a way to weaken the dollar. At least one election for President was decided by people voting against the rascal who wanted to expand the supply of weaker silver dollars. People correctly understood it was an attempt to siphon value out of the currency. Yet even though the silver dollar was weaker than the gold dollar, it stands as a pillar of strength compared to the fiat dollar that our rulers make our “legal tender.” If you melted down one of those “weak” silver dollars, the value in metal is currently equal to $13.77!

Even lesser coinage has suffered in quality as the pace of siphoning wealth from your pockets to those of the politically well-connected accelerates. During WWII, nickels were made out of one forth silver and the rest copper. The melt value of those nickels today is over a dollar! After the war, nickels went back to being one fourth nickel and three fourths copper, but now the nickel is in trouble. The currency has been so abused that the melt value of a nickel is about worth a nickel. If the dollar loses anymore value the melt value of a nickel will be worth more than its monetary value. The currency will literally not be worth the metal that it is stamped on!

This happened to the penny some time ago. Pennies from before 1983 are copper and have a melt value of almost two pennies! The government “fixed” this problem by changing the composition of a penny. It is now made out of cheaper zinc rather than copper. I expect the same to happen to the nickel soon.

The Tea Party Has Been Hijacked By RINO Establishment

Says the Conservative Crusader, and I tend to agree. I highly recommend this article.

"A few months ago, I am on-record predicting that it is not possible to hijack the Tea Party or 912 movements. I was wrong - Both have since been hijacked!......"

Saturday, July 17, 2010

Good Read on "America's Ruling Class"

From the American Spectator. A long, but very thought-provoking read.

UPDATE: RUSH SPENT MOST OF THE SHOW MONDAY ON THIS COLUMN. Not sure if he is really still in the class he thinks he is or not.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Ron Paul on Instruments of Tyranny

The Bush clips especially show how far Bush's pre-election rhetoric was from his actions.

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

POW Net Radio: Shelter from the Coming Storm

No one with any sense is in a position to change policy, and even if they were it may be too late to avoid disaster. Mark talks instead about how to survive it, and he saves the best advice for last.

30 minute audio archive here.

TV Poll - 94% Would Vote To Deny Benefits To Illegal Aliens/Illegals Admit Getting State Benefits

(KAIT TV poll July 6, 2010)

KAIT8 TV led off their 5:00 news on Tuesday, July 5 with the news that Secure Arkansas, a grassroots organization, had submitted the required number of signatures to place an amendment to limit public benefits to illegal aliens on the November ballot. [The secretary of state a week later said there was not a sufficient number of signatures ] The news lead mentioned the illegal alien problem in Arkansas and the nation and interviewed the lst District Director of Secure Arkansas in Jonesboro, Debbie Pelley. Pelley said 95% of the registered voters she asked to sign the petition did so.

They asked viewers to participate in their TV poll with this question, "Would you vote for a state constitutional amendment to deny state social services to illegal immigrants? Yes or No. They carried the story on their 5:00 pm, 6:00 pm, and 10:00 pm news. At 10:00 they announced the results of their poll (which is their ordinary way of handling their polls) 96% answered yes on the poll and 4% No. Then they carried the story the next day on TV.

KAIT8 TV also interviewed Executive Director of the Hispanic Center of Jonesboro who admitted that she "recognizes that some illegal immigrants take advantage of public benefits, but she said many use them out of necessity." A canvasser for the petition was called a liar by Governor Beebe's spokesman when she told him that illegal aliens were getting benefits from several sources in Arkansas. We wonder if the Governor's office will believe this report from the Hispanic Center. We also wonder if Gomez realizes that, "For everyone who is given something, someone else has something taken away." Arkansans understand this; our governor and others who are fighting our petition seem to ignore this fact.

Below are excerpts from the story they posted on KAIT 8 website: Immigration Petition makes way to Region 8 by Josh Harvison

Immigration Petition makes way to Region 8
By Josh Harvison - bio email

"JONESBORO, AR (KAIT) – Secure Arkansas, which claims to be a grassroots organization against illegal immigration, submitted a petition of signatures to Secretary of State Charlie Daniels' office Friday. The petition includes a measure that would prohibit individuals to obtain certain public services without documentation proving citizenship. According to Debbie Pelley, Coordinator of District 1/Craighead County, the measure would not include individuals younger than 14-year old.

"We want to stop the illegal immigrants from coming to Arkansas and we believe we're pretty much a magnet for them because of the different states that have passed different laws," said Pelley.

"Pelley said Arkansas has become a hotbed for illegal immigration because it hasn't enacted legislation that toughens immigration laws.

"We haven't passed any laws and we haven't been diligent like some other states have to try to do something about the situation," said Pelley. "Democrats want it because they want the votes and republicans want it because they want their big businesses to have employees so both parties are involved in the problem. . ."

"There was a guy from Australia who signed our petition who was here legally, said he spent 4,500 dollars to get his citizenship and he resents the fact that it seems like the Hispanics are a favored race and they get all these benefits and everything without going through all the measures that they had to go through," said Pelley. "Anytime anybody gets something free, somebody else has worked for it and that seems to be the big resentment there."

"Pelley said 95% of the registered voters she asked to sign the petition did so. The organization sent a petition with more than 78,000 signatures. They only needed 77,468 signatures. .

"Secure Arkansas says there have been loop holes in the law and a lack of enforcement against illegal immigrants. . .

"We already had the laws passed and it was a crime if they defrauded the system, well why would they not defraud the system? They've already committed a crime to come over here," said Pelley.

"I respect their point of view but I really think that that's not the way to do things," said Gina Gomez, Executive Director of the Hispanic Center of Jonesboro. "There are several social problems in our countries; there is the impossibility of finding a job and having the means to provide for your families."

Gomez said she recognizes that some illegal immigrants take advantage of public benefits, but she said many use them out of necessity. "
End of Excepts

I wonder if Gomez realizes that, "When anyone gets something free, someone else has worked for it, and for everyone who is given something, someone else has something taken away." Anyone who understands that simple fact should understand why Arkansans are so adamantly against illegal aliens getting state benefits. Most people prefer to give to charities of their choice, rather than having their money taken from them. Arkansans understand this; our governor and others who are fighting the petition seem to ignore this fact.

To put it even more plainly, citizens see their government officials as stealing from them, the citizens, and giving it to non citizens. No wonder the people are screaming for new government officials!

This article can also be found at this link:

Rebuttal to Beebe's Response on Illegal Alien Petition

On June 30 Women Action Grup posted an article on this blog entitled " "Governor's Office Blasts Ballot Initiative on Illegal Aliens" You can read that article at this link: This is a follow up to that article.

Below is Governor Beebe's response to someone who emailed him about his position on opposing the Illegal Alien Petition after the email detailing the conversation with his spokesman, Matt DeCample, about Governor Beebe's position on the ballot initiative on immigration was sent.

In bullet one below (in blue font) Beebe states that, "Legal status is verified before benefits are extended." But he doesn't say HOW they are verified. Hours of researching these various memos by the Departments' memos that supply food stamps and other state benefits reveal that there are so many loopholes and weak forms of verification that in the end almost any illegal alien can qualify. Illegal aliens can be given benefits based on about twenty things including affidavits saying they are U.S. Citizens. Once their verification is accepted by one Arkansas department, then other departments must accept that verification. And it is noted in the Medicaid Department memos that illegal aliens do not have to prove citizenship to get prenatal care. That benefit was a gift from Governor Huckabee without legislation even being passed.

Why not require the same certification for receiving benefits that is required in bullet 2 below for a driver's license – a birth certificate or a passport rather than the numerous other substitutes the state is now accepting as certification for receiving benefits. The need for those was pointed out to me by a Cuban legal immigrant who had had a great deal of experience working with illegal aliens in Arkansas. She told us that requiring a birth certificate or passport for verification would take care of 90% of the problems and that is the documentation used by other countries to verify citizenship.

Also in bullet one below Beebe says that "Any attempt to defraud the system [by the illegal immigrants] to gain benefits is a criminal offense." Big Deal! The illegal aliens have already committed a crime when they crossed our borders illegally. And just how many illegal immigrants have been charged, prosecuted, or sentenced? (Have you ever heard of any? And if they were charged, what is the penalty for the fraud?

Perhaps Beebe's office could supply us with the number of prosecutions for defrauding the system. The Hispanic Center here in Arkansas admitted in a TV news program that "some illegal immigrants take advantage of public benefits, but she said many use them out of necessity." Our own citizens would like to use them "out of necessity" as well. Arkansans understand that for everyone who is given something, someone else has something taken away.

And what would they do with the illegal aliens if they charged and prosecuted them? Deport them? No, Beebe said even in his response below that "The State of Arkansas does not have the legal authority to deport anyone." (Maybe the feds WOULD deport them if they were charged with a crime?)

So the only solution would be to put them in prison and pay the huge costs associated with the prosecution and the imprisonment costs. Beebe acknowledges below that he WILL NOT spend the money to arrest them and detain them for their crime of illegally crossing our border, - then why would he arrest them and detain them for defrauding our state benefits? And why would the illegal aliens be afraid to defraud the system if they see no one being charged for coming here illegally or for illegally applying for benefits? This is a perfect example of how ignoring one crime leads to another crime and then to a cover up and to the dilemma in which we now find ourselves in our country.

And we see why so many Arkansans and those that worked in the offices where state benefits are given are correct when they say that illegal aliens are getting all kinds of benefits for which taxpayers are paying.

It has already been proven that illegal aliens don't have to be deported if their jobs and benefits are withdrawn. They leave on their own accord. That is why it is so important that the ballot initiative to prevent persons unlawfully present in the United States from receiving our state benefits be adopted.

Governor Beebe refers to another law in Arkansas in the 3rd bullet below: Beebe states in the 3rd paragraph that Arkansas law requires state government agencies to certify that "it, and any subcontractors with which it does business, does not employ illegal immigrants." "The state has the ability to terminate contracts with those who do not comply with this law." But is this being enforced? Have you heard of any businesses that have been denied contracts for not complying with this law? Could the state not make the contractors keep a copy of a birth certificate or a passport of their workers on hand and randomly check those records and verify the citizenship of their workers? Terminating just a couple of contracts might make the other companies stop hiring illegal aliens.

And we know that legislators have written bills that would strengthen our laws in Arkansas, but because Governor Beebe has such a high approval rating and so much influence those bills either never made it out of committee or failed to pass.

Regarding his last paragraph below where Beebe has called on Congress to pass meaningful immigration reform, we all know what Congress tried to pass before and is trying to pass now – amnesty and the Dream Act where college students get scholarships and in state tuition, the very law the legislators in Arkansas voted down. Then there would be no limits at all on benefits – just what the Democrats seem to want. That is what they call meaningful reform!

Our governor and most Democrats cling to their agenda even though 94% of the responders in a KAIT poll this week voted Yes on the following question. "Would you vote for a state constitutional amendment to deny state social services to illegal immigrants? Yes or No

Below is the email Governor Beebe's office sent to a constituent. In this email Beebe' office did not say that he was opposing the petition even though his office adamantly proclaimed they opposed it as detailed in an earlier email sent to you.

From: Jenny Boshears
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 9:45 AM
Subject: RE: Petition

Governor Beebe has seen your e-mail concerning immigration issues and has asked me to respond to you.

The Governor shares your concerns about the impact of illegal immigration on Arkansas. State government has taken a number of steps to ensure that the State is not spending tax dollars to employ illegal immigrants or support illegal immigration:

• In Arkansas, illegal immigrants are prevented – by law and regulation – from receiving welfare, food stamps, free medical care provided by the State and heating assistance. Legal status is verified before benefits are extended. Any attempt to defraud the system to gain benefits is a criminal offense.
• Arkansas requires all applicants for a driver’s license to supply two documents confirming their legal status, such as a birth certificate or a passport. Any attempt to defraud the system to get a driver’s license is a criminal offense.
• In 2007, Governor Beebe signed Act 157 which prohibits state government agencies from contracting with businesses that employ illegal immigrants. This prohibition extends to subcontractors as well. Any business that wishes to bid for a state contract must certify that it, and any subcontractor with which it does business, does not employ illegal immigrants. The state has the ability to terminate contracts with vendors who do not comply with this law.

Governor Beebe believes that the ultimate responsibility to secure our nation’s borders and enforce our immigration laws lies with the federal government, and he has said many times that he will not raise taxes in Arkansas to do a job that Arkansas’s citizens are paying the federal government to do. The State of Arkansas does not have the legal authority to deport anyone. To arrest and detain illegal immigrants would require new taxes to expand our already-crowded state prisons and county jails. To hold illegal immigrants in the State’s custody until federal officials retrieve them for deportation could cost millions in additional State revenue, annually. To do so while our nation’s borders are not secure does nothing to prevent illegal immigrants from returning to the United States, and to Arkansas, almost immediately after they are deported.

Governor Beebe has called on Congress to address this issue and to pass meaningful immigration reform that will secure our borders and uphold the laws of the United States, while at the same time providing opportunities for individuals who wish to enter our country legally to do so.

This article can also be found at this link:

Sunday, July 11, 2010

Best Advice for the Coming Hard Times

My last two columns have been about how we can protect ourselves from some of the terrible economic consequences that are beginning to fall on this nation because of the foolishness and corruption of our ruling class- from both parties. The technical name for what’s coming is stagflation. Prices will rise, but incomes will not keep pace. While a few well-connected looters at the top will become obscenely rich, the middle and working classes will be all but destroyed. I don’t need a time machine to know this, just a history book. This is what has happened to every nation which conducted its financial affairs the way ours are being conducted. In fact, these things have already begun to happen.

I am saving the best advice for last, but first a re-cap of the last two columns: I talked about the need to have a small cash cushion for emergencies, and then savings that are not in dollars. Every modest home should have fifty ounces of silver as savings (that you can hold two years or more) that won’t lose its value like the dollar does. Pay off all credit cards that don’t have a fixed and low rate of interest. Home owners, if you have a fixed rate mortgage, try to keep your home even if it appears now like you owe more on it than it is worth. That will change when inflation hits. Homeowners with a variable rate home loan should refinance to a fixed rate, even if it does not lower your monthly payment. If your bank says you don’t have the equity for it, there are local places that specialize in mortgages which may still be able to help you.

It has been said that when people lose everything, they “lose it.” I expect to see more crime and social unrest. Every household should possess a firearm, including a rifle or shot gun. And without ammo, a rifle is just a club. Have at least 100 rounds on hand. If you are a person who has lots of guns and little ammo, sell a gun and get ammo for the ones you keep. Ammo keeps well, and like silver and food, its price will go up as the dollar sinks.

I have saved the best advice for last. The most important asset we have is not gold, silver, or ammunition. It’s each other. We are going to need community we can trust. If you don’t know your neighbors, get to know them. If you are at odds with any of them, so far as it depends on you, make peace with them. Perhaps you each have tools and resources which can help the other. You are soon going to need each other’s good will a lot more than you do now.

That goes double for family. Right now, one spouse may be down and the other up. The temptation may be to dump a spouse that has been down for a while, regardless of the vows of your youth. Two years from now though, the situation may be reversed. We are in times where even people of good character are down through no real fault of their own. Next it may be your turn. If you were there for your spouse when they were down, you have earned a mate who will do the same for you.

We have to decide if we are going to let the stress of these hard times make us lash out at everyone around us, or use it to build up non-tangible assets like family and community good will.

Saturday, July 10, 2010

SOS Refuses to Verify Petition Signatures

Sec. of State Daniles: Why is this man smiling? He just (illegally as far as I can tell) dismissed the voter's petition to limit taxpayer benefits to illegal aliens.


Roby Brock reports that the SOS's office has dismissed Secure Arkansas' petition to limit taxpayer benefits to illegal aliens. Charlie Daniels' office claimed they hired an "independent" accounting firm to count the number of signatures on the ballot. For the nonce, I will forgo comment on how "independent" a firm hired by people against the amendment can be when counting signatures for the amendment. The firm claimed only some 67,542 signatures were collected. Secure Arkansas claimed 78,211, less than a thousand over the number required to get on the ballot.

What is supposed to happen according to amendment 7 of the state's constitution and title seven chapter nine of the Arkansas Code both linked to here, is that the SOS's office is supposed to take up to 30 days to verify the signatures and report to the petitioners how many votes they fell short. The petitioners are then supposed to have 30 days to make up the difference.

Instead what seems to have happened is that the SOS hired an accounting firm to tell them that they don't have to verify the signatures. Secure Arkansas people who helped deliver the signatures assure me that they had the raw number.

I invite any legally minded person to read the amendment and associated statute linked above. There is no provision for the SOS to hire an outside accounting firm that has the power to let them off the hook from complying with the amendment. In addition, the way signatures are counting is very favorable for the petitioners. As long as a voter can be ID, the signature counts even if some of the rest of the information is missing. And if verification is contested, the amendment goes to the ballot while the court case is in progress. The SOS is apparently pulling this extra-constitutional move in order to claim that verification never began and does not have to begin. That's not how I read it, I invite you to do the same.

Unfortunately, the statue does not have any sanction if the Secretary of State brazenly refuses to verify or do anything else in the amendment or statute.

Secure Arkansas is supposed to meet with their lawyers today. I think they have a good case. I just hope they have the money to fight it in court.

Thursday, July 08, 2010


Wednesday, July 07, 2010

Hall of Shame on Audit the Fed Vote Includes Berry and Synder

There is a lot of duplicity in politics. Here we see two guys who are going out, and thus won't have to answer at the ballot box for their votes, pull a fast one. After co-sponsoring Ron Paul's "Audit the Fed" bill, enough co-sponsors switched their votes to keep that audit out of the final "finance reform" bill. So why did they pull a Blanche Lincoln card check move and vote against an idea that they co-sponsored shortly before hand? Duplicity is a reasonable explanation. Certainly it can't be because the average voter does not want the Federal Reserve to have a true and complete audit.

Switched to 'Nay' after co-sponsoring H.R.1207

Adler, John (D-N.J.)
Altmire, Jason (D-Pa.)
Arcuri, Michael (D-N.Y.)
Baird, Brian (D-Wash.)
Baldwin, Tammy (D-Wis.)
Barrow, John (D-Ga.)
Berkley, Shelley (D-Nev.)
Berry, Marion (D-Ark.)
Bishop, Sanford (D-Ga.)
Bishop, Timothy (D-N.Y.)
Boccieri, John (D-Ohio)
Boren, Dan (D-Okla.)
Boswell, Leonard L. (D-Iowa)
Boyd, Allen (D-Fla.)
Braley, Bruce (D-Iowa)
Bright, Bobby (D-Ala.)
Brown, Corrine (D-Fla.)
Chandler, Ben (D-Ky.)
Chu, Judy (D-Calif.)
Clay, William Lacy (D-Mo.)
Cohen, Steve (D-Tenn.)
Conyers, John (D-Mich.)
Courtney, Joe (D-Conn.)
Cuellar, Henry (D-Texas)
Dahlkemper, Kathleen (D-Pa.)
Davis, Danny (D-Ill.)
Davis, Lincoln (D-Tenn.)
DeFazio, Peter (D-Ore.)
Delahunt, Bill (D-Mass.)
Doggett, Lloyd (D-Texas)
Doyle, Michael (D-Pa.)
Driehaus, Steve (D-Ohio)
Edwards, Donna (D-Md.)
Farr, Sam (D-Calif.)
Filner, Bob (D-Calif.)
Fudge, Marcia (D-Ohio)
Gordon, Bart (D-Tn.)
Grijalva, Raul (D-Ariz.)
Halvorson, Deborah (D-Ill.)
Hare, Phil (D-Ill.)
Harman, Jane (D-Calif.)
Heinrich, Martin (D-N.M.)
Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie (D-S.D.)
Higgins, Brian (D-N.Y.)
Hill, Baron (D-Ind.)
Hinchey, Maurice (D-N.Y.)
Hinojosa, Ruben (D-Texas)
Hirono, Mazie (D-Hawaii)
Holden, Tim (D-Pa.)
Inslee, Jay (D-Wash.)
Jackson, Jessie (D-Ill.)
Johnson, Henry (D-Ga.)
Johnson, Eddie Bernice (D-Texas)
Kagen, Steve (D-Wis.)
Kaptur, Marcy (D-Ohio)
Kildee, Dale (D-Mich.)
Kilpatrick, Carolyn (D-Mich.)
Kissell, Larry (D-N.C.)
Kosmas, Suzanne (D-Fla.)
Kucinich, Dennis (D-Ohio)
Langevin, James (D-R.I.)
Lewis, John (D-Ga.)
Loebsack, David (D-Iowa)
Lofgren, Zoe (D-Calif.)
Luján, Ben Ray (D-N.M.)
Maffei, Daniel (D-N.Y.)
McDermott, Jim (D-Wash.)
McGovern, James (D-Mass.)
Melancon, Charlie (D-La.)
Michaud, Michael (D-Maine)
Miller, Brad (D-N.C.)
Murphy, Christopher (D-Conn.)
Murphy, Scott (D-N.Y.)
Murphy, Patrick (D-Pa.)
Nadler, Jerrold (D-N.Y.)
Oberstar, James (DFL-Minn.)
Ortiz, Solomon (D-Texas)
Pascrell, Bill (D-N.J.)
Pastor, Ed (D-Ariz.)
Payne, Donald (D-N.J.)
Perlmutter, Ed (D-Colo.)
Peterson, Collin (D-Minn.)
Pingree, Chellie (D-Maine)
Polis, Jared (D-Colo.)
Quigley, Mike (D-Ill.)
Reyes, Silvestre (D-Texas)
Richardson, Laura (D-Calif.)
Rodriguez, Ciro (D-Texas)
Rothman, Steven (D-N.J.)
Ruppersberger, C.A. Dutch (D-Md.)
Ryan, Tim (D-Ohio)
Salazar, John T. (D-Colo.)
Sarbanes, John (D-Md.)
Schakowsky, Janice (D-Ill.)
Schauer, Mark (D-Mich.)
Schiff, Adam (D-Calif.)
Schrader, Kurt (D-Ore.)
Scott, David (D-Ga.)
Shea-Porter, Carol (D-N.H.)
Sherman, Brad (D-Calif.)
Shuler, Heath (D-N.C.)
Slaughter, Louise McIntosh (D-N.Y.)
Smith, Adam (D-Wash.)
Snyder, Vic (D-Ark.)
Speier, Jackie (D-Calif.)
Spratt, John (D-S.C.)
Stark, Fortney Pete (D-Calif.)
Sutton, Betty (D-Ohio)
Thompson, Bennie (D-Miss.)
Tierney, John (D-Mass.)
Tonko, Paul (D-N.Y.)
Visclosky, Peter (D-Ind.)
Walz, Timothy (DFL-Minn.)
Weiner, Anthony (D-N.Y.)
Welch, Peter (D-Vt.)
Wu, David (D-Ore.)
Yarmuth, John (D-Ky.)

Not voting

Bishop, Rob (R-Utah)
Taylor, Gene (D-Miss.)
Wamp, Zach (R-Tenn.)
Woolsey, Lynn (D-Calif)
Young, Don (R-Alaska)

Patriots On Watch: The Scriptures and Illegal Immigration

Mark addresses the scriptures that pro-illegal immigration forces use to justify their position. The positions of Southern Baptist Rev. Richard Land and Catholic Bishop Taylor are examined as well. Also, The WKUK have some great satire.
31 minute audio file here.

Autism-Aborted Fetal Vaccine Link Studied

Here is a link to a brief report on the study from a pro-life group, with more technical links to an ongoing study. This is not the kind of story the corporate media wants you to hear. That's NOT a word from their sponsors.

I found surprising that apparently snippets of human DNA, originally from the aborted babies, makes it into certain vaccines. The brief says there is a recommended FDA limit for this material, and some of these vaccines are way over it.

Here is a story with a link to a graph which shows a shocking correlation between mandating more vaccines with aborted fetal tissue and a rise in autism rates.

Tuesday, July 06, 2010

Every Political Ad You Have Ever Seen Unspun!

WKUK Whitehouse Press Conference Surpirse Revelation

There is one instance of obscene language in this video, and many laughs.

Sunday, July 04, 2010

Brummet Right On UP DOWN

John Brummett says he is using the whose up and whose down column as a holiday crutch, but I am astounded to say that I agree with his findings.

He did forget to give Secure Arkansas an UP arrow for their achievement of getting enough signatures to get their amendment to restrict taxpayer funded benefits to illegal aliens on the ballot though.

He also gave the Bailout supporting Congressman John Boozman and up arrow for the simple reason he is running for U.S. Senate against the ultimate down arrow- Bailout supporting Blanche Lincoln. True enough. He notes that while Boozman was trying to distinguish himself from Lincoln on abortion, Boozman made the very basic mistake of referring to himself as "pro-choice".

What "I'm pro-life" means to establishment Republicans is that in a jam you SAY you are pro-life to mollify pro-life voters but you DO nothing to save babies lives. He quietly votes right on the few marginal pro-life bills that come up, I give him that much credit because it is true. But he has not been a vocal advocate for the defense of innocent life. I wish he had been. He had a perfect opportunity to do so representing a strongly pro-life district for eight years. If he had been a vocal proponent, maybe he would have been practiced enough to avoid the obvious blunder of referring to himself as "pro-choice" the first time he dusted off the issue to get votes.

I have often asked people who tell me "at least Boozman is better than Lincoln" to name for me three issues which John Boozman has spoken out strongly for that Lincoln has spoken out strongly against, or vice-versa. Not one person has been able to name even ONE such issue. Now that it is election time, I expect these two establishment pols to contrive some differences between them, but I sure haven't seen it in their last decade of "service".

Saturday, July 03, 2010

Missouri has already enacted Arizona Immigration Law

It turns out that our neighbors to the north have already enacted a law very much like the one in Arizona. They did it in stages years ago!

Ever wish we could trade legislatures with another state? Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, etc....

Why Did Bernie Skoch Meet With John Boozman?

Skoch: meeting with John Boozman?

***UPDATE*** ***UPDATE*** ***UPDATE***

The general himself wrote me and denied the meeting happened at all. Here is his statement.....

"My journalistic experience consists of being editor of the Jacksonville (Arkansas) Junior High School newspaper when I was in the 9th grade, so I make no claim to editorial experience, wisdom, or stature. But I _do_ seem to recall an admonition to always independently confirm sources. I think you failed at that. I am sorely disappointed that someone as widely read as you would report an alleged meeting between John Boozman and me without so much as a phone call to me.

I have no idea who your source is (and it's frankly none of my business), but he or she has given you information that has no basis whatever, so you may wish to consider whether he or she is worthy of your label "reliable."

I have met with John Boozman once in my life. In late June or early July 2009 he called me when he heard I was about to announce as a candidate against him. We had a pleasant breakfast meeting at a fancy restaurant in Springdale. (You may have heard of it: It is on Thompson Street and has golden arches.) I paid for his coffee and for my orange juice. I think he is therefore beholden to me.

That's it.

So, rely on inside sources all you care to. But know that in at least this case, they had it all wrong.

Bernie Skoch"

An inside source tells AW that General Bernie Skoch met with Congressman John Boozman. Skoch is the candidate who challenged Boozman for his house seat before the latter switched races and won the Senate Primary.

So what are they talking about? Anyone know? Anyone want to guess?

Man the Life Boats II (credit card, mortgage debt)

Surviving a falling dollar...

First, let me re-cap from last week before I start talking about credit card debt and mortgages. Last week I talked a bit about something you can do to help protect yourself from inflation and the coming erosion of the U.S. dollar. Inflation in prices means that the dollar is a poor store of value. Of course, you need a small amount of dollars on hand to take care of emergencies, maybe $500-$1,000 of reserves. Beyond that, I advised using some dollars that you can afford to save away for a couple of years to buy some silver or gold.

There are places around where you can get an ounce of silver for around $20. So one advantage saving this way has over a CD is that it does not take a huge amount of money up front.

We live in a time though, where a lot of people have credit card debt, and they have more mortgage debt than perhaps their homes would sell for. What should people do in those situations?

Generally, paying off credit card debt ought to be the highest fiscal priority. There are exceptions. If your credit card debt has an interest rate that is both low and fixed, it may be best to keep a little liquidity by not paying off that debt as fast. This does not apply to new credit card debt. The rules were recently changed so that almost all credit cards can increase their rates on balances run up after May 7th, 2010. For debts incurred before that, it depends on the type of card. Talk to your credit card company to find out what kind of interest rate agreement you were on.

For example, I have a balance on a card from debts I ran up before May 7th, 2010. The interest rate on my balance is a reasonable 7.75% and cannot go up. I am not going to charge any new debts on that card, because they can go up on the rate for new purchases, but I am in no hurry to pay that card off. Holding off on repayment gives me a little breathing room in tough fiscal times. In that circumstance only, it is safe to carry some old credit card debt. Avoid new credit card debt like the plague. Change your lifestyle if you have to.

Let’s talk about mortgages. The only kind of mortgage to have right now is one with a fixed interest rate. It’s the same principle as with the credit card debt. When inflation accelerates, debt with a fixed interest rate shrinks in real value. Debtors with fixed interest rate debt can win in inflation, because they pay back a debt taken in valuable dollars with less valuable dollars later. With variable interest rate debt, debtors can’t win because the cost of the debt goes up with inflation, usually at a time when increases in wages don’t keep up.

If you don’t have a fixed rate home loan, I recommend you try to refinance even if it does not lower your monthly payment. It eliminates the time bomb of coming rate increases with variable mortgages. Given a fixed rate loan, don’t walk away from your home if you can help it. Once inflation hits in a big way, everything will be worth more dollars. That home you have, valued now for $100,000 with $120,000 of fixed rate loans against it, may seem like a bad deal now. It’s not. In 5-10 years everything might double in price- in which case you have $120,000 in loans against a house worth $200,000!

Friday, July 02, 2010

Illegal Alien Petitions Secured

Secure Arkansas has announced that they have secured over 78,000 signatures on their petition to deny certain public benefits to illegal aliens. Congratulations to them on an outstanding grassroots effort.

They had fewer than 1,000 signatures over the limit, so expect the SOS to toss out enough to get them under the limit. There is a remedy for this though. By law they have 30 additional days to gain enough signatures to make up for the ones that are tossed out! Expect petition gatherers out there to keep racking them up for 30 more days.

POW Radio: Social Justice in the Social Gospel

We are hearing a lot about "Social Justice" and "The Social Gospel." Where is this heading for the churches who buy into it? What are signs that your church is buying into it? Is it good theology?

Audio file here.