Informing Hawaii's voters
Submitted by Guest on Sun, 11/09/2014 - 22:50
Did the election last week really mean that much? I took to my Twitter account on Tuesday to point out that the change in control of the Senate from Democrat to Republican actually means very little, despite efforts by politicians and the mainstream media to convince us otherwise. Yes, power shifted, I wrote. But the philosophy on Capitol Hill changed very little. The warfare/welfare state is still alive and well in Washington.
Some were critical of my comment that, “Republican control of the Senate equals expanded neo-con wars in Syria and Iraq. Boots on the ground are coming!”
But unfortunately my fears were confirmed even sooner than I thought. Shortly after the vote, President Obama announced that he would double the number of US troops on the ground in Iraq and request another $5.6 billion to fight his war in the Middle East.
The President also said on Wednesday that he would seek a new authorization for the use of force in Iraq and Syria. He said that a new authorization was needed to reflect, “not just our strategy over the next two or three months, but our strategy going forward.”
That sounds like boots on the ground in an endless war.
Senate Democrats had been competing with Republicans over who would push a more aggressive foreign policy. This may explain their miserable showing on Tuesday: it is likely the honest, antiwar progressives just stayed home on election night. But with the Republican victory bringing to leadership the most hawkish of the neoconservatives like John McCain, the only fight over the President’s request to re-invade Iraq will be Republican demands that he send in even more soldiers and weapons!
Likewise, the incoming Republicans in the Senate have expressed a foolhardy desire to continue resurrecting the Cold War. They demand that Russia be further sanctioned even as the original reason for the sanctions – claims that Russia was behind the downing of Malaysian Airlines flight MH-17 – has been shown to be false. They want to send weapons to the US-backed government in Ukraine even through it will result in more civilians killed in east Ukraine. Their dangerous Russia policy may even turn the new Cold War into a hot war, which would be catastrophic.
On the domestic front, I do not hold out much hope that the next Congress will give more than lip service to reducing spending. What is more likely is Republicans will support dramatic increases in welfare spending as long warfare spending is increased by an equivalent, or greater, amount. That is what is called “compromise” in Washington.
One positive development from Tuesday is the slightly improved chance for a roll-call vote on “Audit the Fed.” Most of the Senators who are likely to assume leadership roles next year are co-sponsors of the bill. However, special interests that benefit from Fed secrecy are very influential in both parties, so it will be up to the people to continue to pressure Congress for a Senate vote.
Elsewhere, there may also be some rollbacks and reforms of some of the worst parts of ObamaCare, but a full repeal of the bill is unlikely. This is not just because there are still not the votes to override an inevitable veto. The insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies that benefit from ObamaCare are equally influential in both parties and have very deep pockets.
I ended my comments on election night by pointing out that while it may have been an important election, it was not most important ever. Ideas are what really count. And that is where we are winning!
Copyright © 2014 by RonPaul Institute.
Submitted by Guest on Fri, 11/07/2014 - 00:48
November 6, 2014
Introduction by Paul Craig Roberts:Matt Taibbi on the total corruption of the US financial system and its regulatory authorities
Taibbi makes it clear that a few big banks own the government and are not subject to punishment under criminal law. When they commit a crime, they just pay a fine.
Matt Taibbi, Pam Martens, and Nomi Prins are the best financial reporters that we have, and, yes, you guessed it, they do not work for the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, BloombergBusinessWeek, or for the talking head TV financial shows. My hat is off to the three of them. They have taught me a lot.
By Matt Taibbi
The $9 Billion Witness: Meet JPMorgan Chase's Worst Nightmare
Meet the woman JPMorgan Chase paid one of the largest fines in American history to keep from talking
She tried to stay quiet, she really did. But after eight years of keeping a heavy secret, the day came when Alayne Fleischmann couldn't take it anymore.
"It was like watching an old lady get mugged on the street," she says. "I thought, 'I can't sit by any longer.'"
Fleischmann is a tall, thin, quick-witted securities lawyer in her late thirties, with long blond hair, pale-blue eyes and an infectious sense of humor that has survived some very tough times. She's had to struggle to find work despite some striking skills and qualifications, a common symptom of a not-so-common condition called being a whistle-blower.
Read more . . .
The Inside Story Of Matt Taibbi’s Departure From First Look Media by Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, Jeremy Scahill, and John Cook [The Intercept] Oct 30, 2014
Submitted by Guest on Thu, 11/06/2014 - 00:28
By Eric Zuesse
November 5, 2014
The cause of the shooting-down of the Malaysian passenger plane MH-17 on July 17th (while that plane was flying over the conflict-zone during Ukraine’s civil war) is becoming clearer and clearer, despite the rigorous continuing attempts by Western ‘news’ media to cover it up and to hide from the public the evidence that clearly shows what brought down this airliner.
In the months since I headlined on August 24th the news, “MH-17 ‘Investigation’: Secret August 8th Agreement Seeps Out: Perpetrator of the Downing in Ukraine, of the Malaysian Airliner, Will Stay Hidden,” explaining why the leaders of Western nations want these black-box and other basic data to remain hidden, additional evidence has nonetheless become public, and all of it confirms and adds yet further details to the explanation that was first put forth by the retired German Lufthansa pilot Peter Haisenko, whose independent investigation had concluded that Ukrainian Government fighter-jets intentionally shot down this civilian plane.
Precisely how they did it is gradually becoming clearer, despite this continuation of Western secrecy regarding the contents of the black boxes, and of the U.S. satellite images, and of the Ukrainian air-traffic-control radar recordings, and of other evidence-sources that are held by the West and not made available to their ‘news’ media nor to anyone outside a tight official circle of those Western nations’ intelligence agencies.
Read more . . .
Submitted by HPI on Thu, 11/06/2014 - 00:08
HPI: There's something fishy about ISIS and their masked combatants. When have we ever seen an army that consistently to a man hide their faces with masks when their photo is taken?
Submitted by HPI on Wed, 11/05/2014 - 22:15
For the love of money is the root of all evil. —Timothy 6:10, Holy Bible
How money operates in our national and international system is a mysterious subject that is not effectively taught in our schools, making the people highly susceptible to being heavily plucked of theirs while they remain mired in ignorance. The people who run the system, with the help of government, are by and large Jews. Brother Nathanael, a Jew, sheds a little light on how the scam works.
Submitted by HPI on Wed, 11/05/2014 - 04:00
See yesterday's Hawaii election results for yourself, directly from the source, the Hawaii Office of Elections.
Read the fourth and final printout here.
Submitted by Guest on Mon, 11/03/2014 - 23:05
By Robert Willmann, Jr.
Robert Willmann, Jr., is an attorney in San Antonio, Texas. He has previously been an Assistant Criminal District Attorney in Bexar County (San Antonio), and has served as a part-time magistrate in the Bexar County system.
November 4, 2014
Persons not a part of the government have power to decide in only two functions in our state and federal governments—as jurors in court trials and as voters in elections. More accurately, however, today the outsider as decider has the final say in only one particular instance of the two: jurors who unanimously find a criminal defendant “not guilty”.
Otherwise, a jury, if it is permitted to decide issues in the first place, is subject to further review and displacement in civil cases and after a finding of guilt in a criminal case. Votes, though made by secret ballot unconnected to the identity of the voter, are subject to review when the validity of the election is challenged in a civil court action. In deciphering an unclear ballot — perhaps the result of the voter writing an amusing and profane comment by a candidate’s name instead of properly marking the selection — the “intent of the voter” will be decided in court.
This review of voting by the judicial process is no longer relevant, as one stark fact must be made perfectly clear. No election can be assumed valid if electronic voting machines or any related devices are used. Every system has limitations, and the public got a hilarious look at some of them in the 2000 presidential election when in Florida the punch card system choked on its own design.
Read more . . .
Submitted by Guest on Sun, 11/02/2014 - 19:38
November 2, 2014
Last week’s tragic shootings in Canada and Washington state are certain to lead to new calls for gun control. The media-generated fear over “lone wolf terrorists” will enable the gun control lobby to smear Second Amendment supporters as “pro-terrorist.” Marketing gun control as an anti-terrorist measure will also enable gun control supporters to ally with those who support any infringement on liberty done in the name of “homeland security.”
As with most infringements on liberty, gun control will not only make us less free, it will make us less safe. Respecting the right of the people to keep and bear arms is the original and best homeland security policy. Restricting the right of people to arm themselves leaves them with no effective defense against violent criminals or a tyrannical government.
Every year, thousands of Americans use firearms to stop violent criminals. One notable example occurred in September, when Oklahoman Mark Vaughan used a rifle to stop a knife-wielding co-worker who had already killed one person and wounded another. Unfortunately, most of the media coverage focused on speculation that the assailant was motivated by “radical Islam” rather than on Vaughan’s use of a firearm to protect innocent lives.
It is no coincidence that states that pass “concealed carry” laws experience a drop in crime. Since passing concealed carry in Texas in 1995, murder in the state has declined by 52 percent. In comparison, the national murder rate declined by only 33 percent.
Perhaps the best illustration of the dangers of gun control is federal regulations forbidding pilots from having guns in their cockpits. Ironically, this rule went into effect shortly before September 11, 2001. If pilots had the ability to carry guns on 9/11, the hijackers may well have been stopped from attacking the World Trade Center and Pentagon or persuaded to not even try.
Shortly after 9/11, I introduced legislation allowing pilots to carry firearms in the cockpits. Congress eventually passed a bill allowing pilots to carry firearms if they obtain federal certification and obey federal regulations. Aside from the philosophical objection that no one should have to ask government permission before exercising a right, the rules and expensive approval process discourage many pilots from participating in the armed pilots program.
It should not be surprising that the anti-gun Obama Administration wants to eliminate the armed pilots program. I actually agree that the program should be eliminated, so long as pilots who can legally carry a firearm in their states of residence can carry a firearm on the planes they fly. Allowing pilots to carry guns is certainly a more effective way of protecting our security than forcing all airline passengers to endure the TSA.
Both gun control and foreign interventionism disregard the wisdom of the country’s founders.
An interventionist foreign policy, like gun control, threatens our safety. A hyper-interventionist foreign policy invites blowback from those who resent our government meddling in their countries while gun control leaves people defenseless against violent criminals. Returning to a foreign policy of peace and free trade and repealing all federal infringements on the Second Amendment will help guarantee both liberty and security.
Copyright © 2014 by RonPaul Institute.
Submitted by Guest on Sun, 11/02/2014 - 03:09
Real Jew News
By Brother Nathanael Kapner
Brother Nathanael grew up in the U.S. as a Jew and converted to Christianity as a young man. He is now a member of the Russian Orthodox Church and lives in Colorado.
November 1, 2014
THE SCANDAL stirred by Jewish propagandist Jeffrey Goldberg citing an unknown US official calling Netanyahu a ‘chickenshit’ reached its goal. It forced Kerry to grovel an apology to Bibzy.
Goldberg, Jewish snake that he is, cut his venom into Kerry marking him out for reproach:
“Unlike Kerry, I have no hope for the immediate creation of a Palestinian state that could succumb to extremism. But I would like to see Israel foster conditions that would allow for the eventual birth of such a state.” View Entire Story Here.
Goldberg, like ALL Jews, is a liar and his Talmudic doublespeak is evident.
Read more . . .
Submitted by HPI on Sat, 11/01/2014 - 23:57
Hawaii Political Info introduction: Another example of Jewish leaders brainwashing their own. In this case an Orthodox Jew says that the Israeli Army is "an agent of social change," and that they are not going to allow their young men to undergo thought alteration by being forced to join the Army. Orthodox Jews will never wave the white flag on this issue, he says.