FROM THE LOS ANGELES TIMES / CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT RISES TO 11.5% IN MAY / WHAT IS NOT COUNTED IS THE 10 - 15 % THAT ARE NOT DRAWING UNEMPLOYMENT

---

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-california-jobless20-2009jun20,0,3863292.story

Only four states have a higher unemployment rate than California, the U.S. Labor Department says. The national jobless rate is 9.4%.

By Marc Lifsher

7:38 AM PDT, June 19, 2009

Reporting from Sacramento — California's unemployment rate shot up to 11.5% in May, its highest level since current record-keeping began more than three decades ago.

That's a substantial increase over a revised rate of 11.1% in April, the U.S. Department of Labor reported this morning.

The national unemployment rate for May was 9.4%.

Only four states have higher unemployment rates than California: Michigan at 14.1%, Oregon at 12.4% and Rhode Island and South Carolina, tied at 12.1%.

Unemployment in California in May 2008 stood at 6.8%

marc.lifsher@latimes.com

*** Califstareart ***

California is the true heart of
the nation! *** Califstarheart *

FROM THE WASHINGTON TIMES / MINNESOTA LAWMAKER VOWS NOT TO COMPLETE CENSUS / GOOD FOR YOU MICHELLE BACHMANN, R-MINNESOTA / WE ARE BEHIND YOU TOTALLY!

By Stephen Dinan (Contact) | Wednesday, June 17, 2009

EXCLUSIVE:

Outspoken Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann says she's so worried that information from next year's national census will be abused that she will refuse to fill out anything more than the number of people in her household.

In an interview Wednesday morning with The Washington Times "America's Morning News," Mrs. Bachmann, Minnesota Republican, said the questions have become "very intricate, very personal" and she also fears ACORN, the community organizing group that came under fire for its voter registration efforts last year, will be part of the Census Bureau's door-to-door information collection efforts.

"I know for my family the only question we will be answering is how many people are in our home," she said. "We won't be answering any information beyond that, because the Constitution doesn't require any information beyond that."

Shelly Lowe, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Census Bureau, said Mrs. Bachmann is "misreading" the law.

Audio clip

The Washington Times America's Morning News (interview with Rep. Michele Bachmann)

She sent a portion of the U.S. legal code that says anyone over 18 years of age who refuses to answer "any of the questions" on the census can be fined up to $5,000.

The Constitution requires a census be taken every 10 years. Questions range from number of persons in the household and racial information to employment status and whether anyone receives social services such as food stamps.

Mrs. Bachmann said she's worried about the involvement of ACORN, the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now, in next year's census.

TWT RELATED STORIES:
• Lawmakers attack Fed's expanded role
• Democrats urged to play up 'clean' energy
• Partisan splits show in health care debate
• Sen. Boxer to officer: Don't call me ma'am

"They will be in charge of going door to door and collecting data from the American public," she said. "This is very concerning."

ACORN has applied to help recruit workers to help conduct the census. Republican lawmakers and some public interest groups have expressed concern over their involvement.

ACORN staffers have ben indicted in several states on charges of voter registration fraud stemming from the organization's efforts to register voters last year.

Mrs. Bachmann, who is in her second term in the House, has become a lightning rod for criticism from Democrats and liberal talk show hosts for her unapologetic conservative views.

She said she considers that "a badge of honor."

"It's clear when a person speaks out against those policies they become a target, and that should be concerning to everyone," she said.

*** Califstareart ***

California is the true heart of
the nation! *** Califstarheart *

FROM THE WASHINGTON TIMES / 'OBAMA INITIATIVES HIT SPEED BUMPS ON CAPITOL HILL' / YA THINK??? - MAYBE 'HOPE & CHANGE' WILL ALL COLLAPSE BY 2010!

THE PERVERTED 'HOPE' OF THE 'BAMA' MEDICAL CARE BILL OPTIONS IS QUICKLY LOSING GROUND. HOW CAN THIS RADICAL PROGRESSIVE THINK THAT PEOPLE WILL CONTINUE TO PUT UP WITH HIM BANKRUPTING THE UNITED STATES? EVERYONE KEEP UP THE GOOD FIGHT AND LET ALL FEDERAL REPRESENTATIVES KNOW THAT YOU ARE TOTALLY AGAINST ANY GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION IN OUR CURRENT 'HEALT CARE' STATUS!

High Price Tag For Reform Bill Prompts Sparring And a Delay

By Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 19, 2009

President Obama's hopes for quick action on comprehensive health-care reform ran headlong this week into the realities of Congress, as lawmakers searching for the money to pay for a broad expansion of coverage discovered that it wasn't easy to find and descended into partisan -- and intraparty -- bickering.

A set of unexpectedly high cost estimates -- arcane data that nevertheless carry enormous import in the legislative process -- sent shockwaves along Pennsylvania Avenue and forced one key committee to delay action on its bill, probably until after the July 4 recess.

In a high-level meeting at the White House yesterday, Obama conveyed his concern over early pronouncements by the Congressional Budget Office that a bill drafted by the Senate health committee would cover just 16 million additional people at a cost of $1 trillion, said one official with knowledge of the session who was not permitted to talk to reporters and so spoke on the condition of anonymity.

"That is not his idea of good, affordable, universal coverage," said this adviser. The preliminary estimate, pounced on by Republicans, "has rattled everyone."

House Democratic leaders, meanwhile, said they will wait until next month to unveil plans for financing their bill.

"All I know is that health-care reform is on life support because the Senate can't figure out how to pay for it," said Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), who was touting his bipartisan bill.

Obama has imbued the health-care debate with a sense of urgency, pressing party leaders to conclude action on the House and Senate floors by Labor Day. But progress has slowed because of the realization that any attempt to provide coverage to the bulk of the nation's 46 million uninsured people will cost an enormous amount of money, even when factoring in potential long-term savings from modernization and efficiencies.

In a speech to the American Medical Association on Monday, Obama bragged that he had spelled out $950 billion worth of budget cuts and tax increases over the next 10 years -- an amount, he said, that takes "us almost all the way to covering the full cost of health-care reform."

But the independent CBO estimated that a draft bill by the Senate Finance Committee would cost $1.6 trillion, a figure that Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) described as "a jolt of reality."

"That was a wake-up call that we have to approach this reform with some caution," she said.

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel acknowledged that $1.6 trillion "is a big number" that forced administration aides and congressional staff to rework the plan. "Everybody now is going to take these bills back and come in below $1 trillion," he said yesterday.

But Emanuel described haggling over cost estimates as a routine part of lawmaking. "Since it's the first inning, I wouldn't call the game," he said.

Late yesterday, Finance Committee members began reviewing the outlines of a more modest approach in the hopes that scaling back some of their plans to cover the working poor could save money.

Though early in the process, administration allies are divided over the timetable.

Ralph Neas, a veteran liberal advocate who runs the National Coalition on Health Care, said a thorough debate is likely to continue through Thanksgiving or Christmas.

But John Podesta, who oversaw the Obama transition and now leads the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, said the most promising window of opportunity is before Labor Day.

"If this languishes into the fall, there's every reason to believe the attempts to make this bipartisan will be overwhelmed by the attacks coming from partisans in particular," he said.

The arduous task of overhauling the nation's entire $2.2 trillion health system has been further complicated by the absence of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), chairman of the health committee, who is arguably the most knowledgeable lawmaker on the issue. He is battling brain cancer.

"His absence has an enormous impact," said Sheila Burke, a health-policy expert and longtime aide to former Senate majority leader Robert J. Dole (R-Kan.). Still, she said, tackling sweeping health reform would be difficult even with Kennedy on the job full-time.

The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, under the temporary leadership of Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), began work on a partial bill crafted largely by Kennedy aides. Republicans complained of being left out.

"I am personally somewhat -- well, actually, very -- disappointed," said Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah). "I wanted a thoughtful bipartisan compromise that could have become a lasting legacy for my dear friend, Ted Kennedy."

Like Obama, Sen. Mike Enzi (Wyo.), the panel's ranking Republican, said he was distressed by the CBO report showing that the bill would cost $1 trillion and cover just 16 million more people.

In addition, the draft did not include some of the most costly and controversial sections of the bill. That situation "does nothing to advance the cause," said Richard Kirsch, national campaign manager of the labor-backed pro-reform group Health Care for America Now.

Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) said the price tag could easily reach $2 trillion, prompting Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) to reply that Gregg was throwing "sand in the gears."

A frustrated Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) blamed the delays on Republicans.

"I'm sorry to say they have subscribed to more of the same stalling strategy that the American people are sick and tired of," he said in a floor speech yesterday.

But there was disagreement within his own party.

As Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) assembled a bipartisan group of senators dubbed the "coalition of the willing," Dodd played down the need to negotiate with the other side. "My goal is to write a good bill," he said. "My goal is not bipartisanship."

*** Califstareart ***

California is the true heart of
the nation! *** Califstarheart *

FROM REUTERS / ROUBINI OF RGE GLOBAL MONITOR SAYS U.S. HAS SIGNIFICANT RISK OF A 'DOUBLE - DIP' RECESSION / GEEEE.....YA THINK?

THE UNITED STATES IS IN A BAD WAY AND THE TRUTH OF JUST HOW BAD IT REALLY IS, IS NOT BEING TOLD TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. CHECK THINGS OUT WITH GLENN BECK AND OTHERS THAT TELL THE TRUTH, TO GET THE REAL STORY.....

By Pedro da Costa and Ros Krasny

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S. economy will not recover until the end of this year, and even then growth will remain meek and vulnerable to higher interest rates and commodity prices, economist Nouriel Roubini said on Tuesday.

Roubini, who rose to prominence for predicting the global credit crisis, tore down the "green shoots" theory that a rebound is imminent, saying there was a significant risk of a "double-dip" recession where the economy expands slightly only to begin contracting again.

"In addition to green shoots there are also yellow weeds," he told the Reuters Investment Outlook Summit in New York.

He pointed to the growing divergence between business sentiment surveys, which have been improving in recent months, and industrial production, which is down sharply and receded another 1.1 percent in May.

Roubini, the head of economics research firm RGE Global Monitor, said the U.S. jobless rate, already at a 26-year high of 9.4 percent, would reach 11 percent before it begins to ease. He added that he saw few engines for growth given that U.S. consumers are tapped out

As a result, Federal Reserve policy-makers, whom Roubini says completely missed the magnitude of the crisis at its inception, face an unenviable set of policy choices.

He said weak growth would allow the U.S. central bank to leave interest rates near the current rock-bottom levels for the foreseeable future. Eventually, however, trillions of dollars of unprecedented emergency measures to heal the financial system will need to be mopped back up to prevent an upsurge in inflation.

Rampant inflation could lead to negative economic cycles like the ones that plagued much of the industrialized world in the 1970s.

"That's the challenge the Fed is facing," Roubini said.

He said the central bank did the right thing to avoid an outright depression, but is left with emergency lending programs that are clearly not sustainable.

These factors, Roubini argued, would continue to pressure the U.S. dollar over the medium term.

Asked to grade the central bank's job, Roubini gave the Fed a "D" for missing the crisis altogether and downplaying its possible impact, but a "B-plus" after the credit debacle had unfolded.

"I give them credit for being very creative and very aggressive," he said.

(Editing by Leslie Adl

*** Califstareart ***

California is the true heart of
the nation! *** Califstarheart *

COMMENTARY BY WILLIAM PESEK / FROM BLOOMBERG NEWS / 'SUITCASE WITH $134 BILLION PUTS DOLLAR ON EDGE'

THE FIRST NEWS OF THIS INCREDIBLE STORY WAS BROUGHT TO ATTENTION BY GLENN BECK AND AIRED ON BOTH HIS RADIO AND TELEVISION SHOW OVER THE LAST WEEK.....IT IS INTERESTING THAT NO ONE GIVES HIM ANY CREDIT FOR INITIALLY QUESTIONING WHY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA WAS NOT COVERING THE STORY. LET US GIVE HIM A BIG THANKS FOR FORCING THE ISSUE!

Commentary by William Pesek June 17 (Bloomberg) -- It’s a plot better suited for a John Le Carre novel.

Two Japanese men are detained in Italy after allegedly attempting to take $134 billion worth of U.S. bonds over the border into Switzerland. Details are maddeningly sketchy, so naturally the global rumor mill is kicking into high gear.

Are these would-be smugglers agents of Kim Jong Il stashing North Korea’s cash in a Swiss vault? Bagmen for Nigerian Internet scammers? Was the money meant for terrorists looking to buy nuclear warheads? Is Japan dumping its dollars secretly? Are the bonds real or counterfeit?

The implications of the securities being legitimate would be bigger than investors may realize. At a minimum, it would suggest that the U.S. risks losing control over its monetary supply on a massive scale.

The trillions of dollars of debt the U.S. will issue in the next couple of years needs buyers. Attracting them will require making sure that existing ones aren’t losing faith in the U.S.’s ability to control the dollar.

The dollar is, for better or worse, the core of our world economy and it’s best to keep it stable. News that’s more fitting for international spy novels than the financial pages won’t help that effort. It is incumbent upon the U.S. Treasury to get to the bottom of this tale and keep markets informed.

GDP Carriers

Think about it: These two guys were carrying the gross domestic product of New Zealand or enough for three Beijing Olympics. If economies were for sale, the men could buy Slovakia and Croatia and have plenty left over for Mongolia or Cambodia. Yes, they could have built vacation homes amidst Genghis Khan’s Gobi Desert or the famed Temples of Angkor. Bernard Madoff who?

These men carrying bonds concealed in the bottom of their luggage also would be the fourth-largest U.S. creditors. It makes you wonder if some of the time Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner spends keeping the Chinese and Japanese invested in dollars should be devoted to well-financed men crossing the Italian-Swiss border.

This tale has gotten little attention in markets, perhaps because of the absurdity of our times. The last year has been a decidedly disorienting one for capitalists who once knew up from down, red from black and risk from reward. It almost fits with the surreal nature of today that a couple of travelers have more U.S. debt than Brazil in a suitcase and, well, that’s life.

Clancy Bestseller

You can almost picture Tom Clancy sitting in his study thinking: “Damn! Why didn’t I think of this yarn and novelize it years ago?” He could have sprinkled in a Chinese angle, a pinch of Russian intrigue, a dose of Pyongyang and a bit of Taiwan-Strait tension into the mix. Presto, a sure bestseller.

Daniel Craig may be thinking this is a great story on which to base the next James Bond flick. Perhaps Don Johnson could buy the rights to this tale. In 2002, the “Miami Vice” star was stopped by German customs officers as he was traveling in a car carrying credit notes and other securities worth as much as $8 billion. Now he could claim it was all, uh, research.

When I first heard of the $134 billion story, I was tempted to glance at my calendar to make sure it didn’t read April 1.

Let’s assume for a moment that these U.S. bonds are real. That would make a mockery of Japanese Finance Minister Kaoru Yosano’s “absolutely unshakable” confidence in the credibility of the U.S. dollar. Yosano would have some explaining to do about Japan’s $686 billion of U.S. debt if more of these suitcase capers come to light.

‘Kennedy Bonds’

Counterfeit $100 bills are one thing; two guys with undeclared bonds including 249 certificates worth $500 million and 10 “Kennedy bonds” of $1 billion each is quite another.

The bust could be a boon for Italy. If the securities are found to be genuine, the smugglers could be fined 40 percent of the total value for attempting to take them out of the country. Not a bad payday for a government grappling with a widening budget deficit and rebuilding the town of L’Aquila, which was destroyed by an earthquake in April.

It would be terrible news for the White House. Other than the U.S., China or Japan, no other nation could theoretically move those amounts. In the absence of clear explanations coming from the Treasury, conspiracy theories are filling the void.

On his blog, the Market Ticker, Karl Denninger wonders if the Treasury “has been surreptitiously issuing bonds to, say, Japan, as a means of financing deficits that someone didn’t want reported over the last, oh, say 10 or 20 years.” Adds Denninger: “Let’s hope we get those answers, and this isn’t one of those ‘funny things’ that just disappears into the night.”

This is still a story with far more questions than answers. It’s odd, though, that it’s not garnering more media attention. Interest is likely to grow. The last thing Geithner and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke need right now is tens of billions more of U.S. bonds -- or even high-quality fake ones -- suddenly popping up around the globe.

(William Pesek is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)

To contact the writer of this column: William Pesek in Tokyo at wpesek@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: June 16, 2009 15:00 EDT

*** Califstareart ***

California is the true heart of
the nation! *** Califstarheart *

FROM MY WAY NEWS / DEMOCRATS TO PUSH THROUGH BANKING OVERHAUL QUICKLY / OMG! THIS IS GETTING SO SERIOUS! / THEY ARE DESTROYING OUR NATION A.S.A.P.!

AND NOW TAKING OVER THE BANKING SYSTEM INTO AN 'ECONOMIC CALIMITY?' OBAMA, PELOSI AND REID ARE CREATING A MESS THAT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO REMEDY.....BUT WE WILL!


Jun 18, 6:13 AM (ET)

By ANNE FLAHERTY

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic leaders have committed to enacting by the end of the year the biggest regulatory revision to the U.S. financial system since the 1930s - an undertaking so ambitious it has some lawmakers worried about missteps.

"We have to evaluate it, weigh it, slow it down and make sure we do it right," said Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, the top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee. "Because if we don't, we will pay dearly."

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was expected to outline the administration's plan on Thursday before the Senate panel and the House Financial Services Committee.

The proposal is aimed at filling in regulatory gaps and increasing oversight of the financial markets to prevent another economic calamity.

"We don't want to stifle innovation," said President Barack Obama in a speech Wednesday.

"But I'm convinced that by setting out clear rules of the road and ensuring transparency and fair dealings, we will actually promote a more vibrant market," he added.

Obama wants to empower the Federal Reserve to oversee the largest and most influential financial firms. He also wants to create a council of federal regulators, chaired by the treasury secretary, to monitor risk across the broader market.

A new consumer protection agency would be created to prevent deceptive practices by such companies as credit card lenders and mortgage brokers.

The proposal was well-received among Democrats on Capitol Hill, who said it would prevent another round of bank bailouts and protect consumers from predatory lending practices.

"We regard this as very pro-market," said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., who chairs the House Financial Services Committee. "Unless you have investors that are well-protected, you don't have a market."

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd said there would be "some debate," but "I think we're all seeking the same results."

But a swift legislative endorsement of the plan could be difficult.

Dodd, D-Conn., is leading a major overhaul of the nation's health care system, while the Senate also faces a debate on whether to confirm Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor.

In addition to the Senate's packed schedule, several lawmakers, including Dodd, have questioned whether Obama's proposal relies too heavily on the Federal Reserve and expressed concern that the Fed, as an independent agency, doesn't answer to Congress.

"It's certainly worthy of a thorough and full-throated debate and discussion as to whether or not that's a better alternative than vesting the Fed," Dodd told reporters after Obama's speech. "There's not a lot of confidence in the Fed at this point."

Geithner told reporters at a briefing that the administration had looked at a range of alternatives to giving the Fed expanded powers and had come to the conclusion that "we do not believe there is a plausible alternative."

Turf fights among lawmakers were also likely, as the plan leaves in question who should regulate derivatives like the credit-default swaps that felled American International Group Inc. (AIG)

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the Securities and Exchange Commission should have the job, calling it a "stronger regulator" than the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Senate Democratic aides said the plan was to take up the bill this fall, regardless of whether the House has had a chance to act.

Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa., who chairs a House Financial Services subcommittee, said he was concerned that a rush job will hand the controls to the Senate.

"If we rush this thing too much, we won't have the opportunity for everyone to buy in," he said.

House Republicans said Obama's plan would go too far and bury the market in unnecessary regulation.

Senate Republicans were less dismissive but stopped far short of endorsing the proposal. Shelby and Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., questioned aspects of the plan but said they hoped to work with Democrats to make it stronger.

ALSO - READ THIS ARTICLE FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL:

June 18, 2009 PUBLIC WARY OF GOVERNMEN DEFICIT, ECONOMIC INTERVENTION:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124527518023424769.html#mod=testMod

*** Califstareart ***

California is the true heart of
the nation! *** Califstarheart *

AN EDITORIAL FROM ACTIVIST SHER ZIEVE / 'OBAMA AND HIS SYNDICATE OPERATING OUTSIDE OF U.S. LAW'

AND THE SAUL ALINSKi DEVOTEE, B. HUSSEIN OBAMA CONTINUES TO HYPNOTIZE THE IGNORANT AND THE RADICAL LEFTIES WHILE HE BREAKS THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES.....

* Saul Alinski's book, 'RULES FOR RADICALS' is the official bible of the so-called corrupt, intimidating 'COMMUNITY ORGANIZERS'.....To read his biography, click on to this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Alinski

EDITORIAL

SOURCE PAGE: http://www.michnews.com/

http://www.michnews.com/Sher_Zieve/sz61709.shtml


Posted in: Sher Zieve
By Sher Zieve
Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - 1:35:23 PM ET


Obama Law (and increasingly the following of ONLY Obama Law) is now the official decree of DIC (Dictator in Chief) Obama in and for Obama-Land­formerly known as the United States of America. Think that statement is an exaggeration? Really? Well­let's take a look, shall we?

• · The Obama Thugocracy has commandeered the largest banks in the USA for its personal use. Although the Obama Syndicate's monetary resources are not yet ­completely­ unlimited, they soon will be. By the way, where has this money gone? The definition of Obama Transparency is “65o hide from any and all for as long as possible. And bear in mind, he is using OUR money to both extort the banks and rule more powerfully over We-the-People. Behind closed doors, the banks were told by President George W. Bush's former US Treasury Secretary and Obama supporter Henry Paulson that they must agree to take government bailout money “or else.” This has come to be known as “an offer they couldn't refuse.” This “offer” was followed by DIC Obama's comment to the bank CEOs: “My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks!” Note: This is a Jesse Jackson-type shakedown that has been taken to previously untried monumental levels. See Ken Timmerman's book “Shakedown” for complete information. Threatening private enterprise­ if it does not submit and allow Obama Theft ­with the weight of the US Government is not only unconstitutional it veritably screams and shouts that the US government has now become a massive criminal enterprise­ increasingly run by Obama and his accountable-to-no-one-but-Obama Czars.
  
• · Using similar gangster-tactics that worked with the cowering bank CEOs, Obama has taken over two of the US' car companies. One of them, Government Motors (formerly known as General Motors), was seized by the Obama Syndicate and its spoils split between it and the United Auto Workers union leadership. Again, the Obama dictatorship used We-the-People's money to finance its deal that places OUR money and power into the pockets of the Obama political elite ­and only those political elite. Unconstitutional? Of course. Criminal? Of course. So­is anyone trying to stop Obama's unconstitutional and criminal seizure of US power? Of course ­NOT. It appears the former “loyal opposition” is also cowering in fear of and from the US dictator.
• · Additional information on Obama's confiscation of 2/3 of the US Auto Industry is that his new “Car Czar” Steven Rattner­ who has thus far avoided any and all interviews from the press and any and all questions from Congress ­is a 31 year old lawyer whose only experience with cars is that of having driven them or having been driven while in them. Obama ­in his unswerving despotic “wisdom”­has also appointed another ‘I know nothing about the auto industry' guys ­former AT&T Chief Edward E. Whitacre, Jr. as Chairman of GM. In other words, GM is neither expected nor planned to be successful. Instead ­like both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac­ the new Government Motors appears to be no more than a new giant slush fund for Democrats.
  
• · A smiling Obama has already admitted that the US is out of money. It's amazing that by Obama having placed his mind and adherents to the task he was able to successfully bankrupt the country in no time at all! Sadly, I predicted this almost a year ago. However, Obama also states that he has no intention of slowing his spending. Instead, he will simply authorize the printing of more increasingly worthless US money. Then, he will tax…tax…tax the American people to death as he works toward his next arena for destruction­ the US Energy industry; which will increase yearly/family energy costs by at least $4,000. All the while, Obama remains smiling at the stupid masses who allowed the “election” of a non-citizen usurper to the presidency of the United States. And, in order to further ensure the subservience of the former American people (soon to be called Obamaites) the US Dictator in Chief plans to control the US Health System. In this way, Obama, his “Health Czar” and his soon-to-be-established Department of Health Police will be able to dictate who receives medical care and who does not (therefore ultimately who lives and who dies), what We-the-People can eat and not eat, what actions we can engage in and those in which we are not allowed to engage etc. etc. etc. After seizing heath care from the private sector and placing it firmly in Obama's governmental hands his power over us will be unlimited. And with no one having the testosterone or internal fortitude to stand up to him, Obama's position of US Dictator for Life is only a moment or two away.

Once the US was a government of laws­not men. Now, however, it has degraded into a government of one man; a man who does not even appear to be a natural-born US citizen as required by the US Constitution. But, until and unless anyone decides to fight for its preservation, the US Constitution is now null and void. Then, to add more insult to more injury, the Obama Administration is now requiring that “high value terrorist detainees” INSIDE OF AFGHANISTAN be given US Miranda Rights. Folks, sanity has not only left the building it has left the country. The totalitarian insane are now firmly and unequivocally in charge and running the country ­into the abyss.

Copyright by Sher Zieve

*** Califstareart ***

California is the true heart of
the nation! *** Califstarheart *

THANKS TO PERI FOR SENDING! / FROM THE LOS ANGELES TIMES / / 'WESTERN STATES WANT REINS ON FEDERAL POWER'

Eliza Wiley / Helena Independent Record

MONTANA STATE REPRESENTATIVE, JOEL BONIEK, SHOWN WITH HIS MULE JESSE, INTRODUCED A BILL SEEKING TO EXEMPT FROM FEDERASL REGULATION ANY FIREARM MADE AND USED WITHIN THE STATE BORDERS.

An expanded federal role prompts declarations of state sovereignty. Montana goes further with a gun bill defying U.S. firearm restrictions. The goal: Keep Washington on its side of the fence.

By Mark Z. Barabak
June 16, 2009

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-west16-2009jun16,0,3422958.story

Reporting from Bozeman, Mont. -- Frustrated by the expanded power of Washington, a growing number of state lawmakers are defying the federal government and passing legislation aimed at rolling back the reach of Congress and President Obama.

While many measures are symbolic ones declaring the sovereignty of states, some Westerners are taking more dramatic steps. One Utah lawmaker wants to limit federal law enforcement in his state. In Montana, legislators enacted a bill that flagrantly ignores federal firearm restrictions, hoping to force a constitutional showdown.

Supporters of the bill want the Supreme Court to eliminate gun controls and, eventually, curtail Washington's ability to set policy on a wide range of issues, including education, civil rights, law enforcement and land use.

"It's about states' rights," said state Rep. Joel Boniek, an independent-turned-Republican from nearby Livingston, who introduced the bill. "Guns are just the vehicle."

The Montana Firearms Freedom Act seeks to exempt from federal regulation any firearm, gun component or ammunition made and kept within the state's borders. The legislation, signed by Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer, becomes law Oct. 1, though federal officials will likely act quickly to keep the measure from taking effect.

Legal experts are skeptical Montana will prevail in court, and even some proponents express their doubts. But supporters say the fight is a necessary step to change Washington's attitude. Similar bills have been introduced in nearly a half dozen states, and lawmakers in about a dozen more have expressed interest.

"We need 15, 25, 30 states to pass these types of legislation, so that we send a clear message to the country and to the national government," said Utah Rep. Carl Wimmer, a Republican from suburban Salt Lake City.

In addition to supporting a version of Montana's gun law, Wimmer is drafting legislation that would forbid local authorities to help enforce federal statutes inside Utah -- another bill that, if passed, would surely trigger a court fight.

"The national government has gained more and more power . . . to a point where we're simply subjects of the ruling masters in Washington, D.C.," said Wimmer, who has established an organization, the Patrick Henry Caucus, to rally like-minded lawmakers from other states. "That is not the way this country and this government were set up."

It is no accident the greatest defiance has surfaced in the West, a region with a history of antipathy toward outsiders and, especially, Washington.

"You're going to get more of it as people look at the growth of the federal government and the big bailout of financial interests," said Eric Herzik, a University of Nevada political scientist and expert on the Sagebrush Rebellion, the populist movement that swept the West a generation ago and helped put Ronald Reagan in the White House.

The sacred text for Wimmer, Boniek and their allies is the Constitution's 10th Amendment, which limits the powers of Washington. Although the language is straightforward -- all powers not specifically delegated to the federal government are reserved for the states -- the meaning has been debated (and elastically interpreted) throughout history.

Conservatives and libertarians have long cited the 10th Amendment to press their case against the expansion of federal power, usually to little avail. Their latest effort is the state sovereignty movement. (Some also refer to the "states' rights" movement, though for many those words evoke the segregated South and efforts to fight racial equality.)

In just the last few months, legislatures in five states -- Alaska, Idaho, North Dakota, Oklahoma and South Dakota -- have passed resolutions asserting their sovereignty and asking the federal government to "cease and desist" from meddling in their business. Similar measures are pending in about two dozen other states, including seven out West.

"There's a lot of people in the federal government saying: 'Do this. You must do that. We're the boss,' " said Republican state Rep. Brad Klippert, co-sponsor of sovereignty legislation pending in Olympia, Wash. "That's not true."

Several Republican governors, including Sarah Palin in Alaska, Mark Sanford in South Carolina and Rick Perry in Texas, have gone beyond symbolism, turning down a portion of federal stimulus funds -- and rejecting the strings attached -- as a way of expressing their independence from Washington. That has sometimes meant going to court and fighting fellow lawmakers eager to accept the money.

The latest movement appears aimed at Obama, who, in just a few months, has increased the size and scope of the federal government more dramatically than any president in decades.

Advocates deny that, citing a litany of grievances that include the No Child Left Behind education bill, which imposed strict federal testing requirements, and the Real ID law, which dictates costly national standards for driver's licenses. Both were signed by President George W. Bush.

Still, Obama and his expansive agenda have unquestionably given momentum to the state sovereignty effort, which has been embraced by Republican politicians like Perry and heavily promoted by sympathetic commentators on conservative TV and talk radio.

For his part, Boniek at one point equated Obama with Hitler, Mao and Stalin, saying each loved his country in his fashion but proved disastrous as a leader. "He's ruining the country I love," Boniek said of Obama, his soft tone belying the harsh comparison. "He doesn't know what freedom is."

It is difficult to say how the Supreme Court might rule on Montana's gun law, which challenges the government's authority under the commerce clause of the Constitution, the legal basis for much federal regulation.

In the mid-1990s, the court struck down a federal law that sought to restrict guns near schools, using the rationale behind Montana's law: that the federal authority over interstate commerce did not extend to a product that was made and used within one state.

More recently, however, the justices rejected a direct challenge to the commerce clause, ruling in 2005 that the federal government had the authority to effectively override California's medical marijuana law, even though the cannabis was being grown and used within the state's borders.

"As an abstract legal matter, it's perfectly plausible," Eugene Volokh, a UCLA expert on constitutional law, said of Montana's case. "But it's very unlikely to succeed in today's legal climate."

Backers of the legislation concede as much. "No federal employee in a black robe is going to roll back the power of the federal government," said Gary Marbut, president of the Montana Shooting Sports Assn., who wrote the bill. "But we want to make a statement, get the legal arguments on the record and get people active."

Boniek, who makes his living operating a crane and leading big-game hunts, is already planning for next year's session. (Montana, like some other Western states, has a part-time legislature.)

He plans to introduce a bill that would make the sheriff the top law enforcement official in each county, requiring federal officers to seek permission to exercise authority in Montana.

For now, Boniek is waiting to see how the fight over his gun bill goes. "The whole thing is like a chess game," he said. "We've made our move. The next move is up to the federal government."

mark.barabak@latimes.com

*** Califstareart ***

California is the true heart of
the nation! *** Califstarheart *