And So I Go: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

Archive for the ‘Project to Restore America’ Category

I thought I was pretty well up on what is happening in our country because I really try hard to keep up and do a lot of reading, but now way was I even close to knowing what is happening to everyday people just like me and you.  This article from the Heritage Foundation is an eye opener and a blood pressure raiser. Be sure and go to all the referred sites for all the information.  The time for We the People to act is now when we have the momentum with the Tea Party and other groups up and moving.  Time for you to get involved too before it has gone too far for the United States and Americans to turn the tide towards tyranny around and defeat those who would imprison us in a country no American wants to live in.  Sincerely, Brenda Bowers  BB

The Government vs. YOU

06/14/2013

Every day, more Americans get trapped by big government. In addition to groups targeted by the IRS, upstanding citizens going about their normal lives are suddenly targeted by law enforcement authorities and charged as criminals. Just a few examples:

 

 

 

USA-v-YOU

These are only a few of the shocking incidents The Heritage Foundation chronicles in our new project, USA vs. YOU. Experts at Heritage’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies reveal the stories of 22 people from all backgrounds, races, and income levels victimized by carelessly written laws.

Get the FREE e-book USA vs. YOU now >>

When criminal laws are created to “solve” every problem, punish every mistake, and compel the “right” behaviors, this troubling trend is known as overcriminalization. Ultimately, it leads to injustice for honest, hard-working Americans at every level of society.

Public interest groups from across the political spectrum recognize how this flood of criminal laws violates our basic liberties. Diverse organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, the American Center for Law and Justice, and Right on Crime, among others, have joined with Heritage to reaffirm the true purpose of America’s justice system: to ensure public safety and protect the innocent.

When was the last time you saw the ACLU work together with a faith-based group like Justice Fellowship? WithUSA vs. YOU, the problem is grave enough to bring together unlikely allies. And we’re delivering this bipartisan message just as the House of Representatives has launched a task force aimed at correcting this issue.

This morning, Heritage Senior Legal Fellow John Malcolm will testify at the first hearing of the Overcriminalization Task Force—shining a spotlight on the scope and severity of this threat to our liberties. Ending the practice of trapping our citizens with unnecessary laws will be no easy task, with an estimated 4,500 criminal law offenses and 300,000 criminal regulations on the books.

Experience the stories of Americans like you treated unjustly – download the FREE e-book now >>

Over the next six months, Members of Congress from both parties will study this issue in depth, hold hearings, and—with the right encouragement—take steps to enact real reform.

This new effort includes tools for you to raise your voice and make a difference in defending our liberties. So explore the documented stories in USA vs. YOU, follow the links, and take real action today to help turn the tide.

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.

Quick Hits:

  • President Obama has changed his policy on Syria, saying that Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons and that the U.S. will provide military support to the rebels.

 

 

 

  • Investigative journalist James O’Keefe has produced some shocking stories of corruption. In a new book, hedetails his undercover work with Project Veritas.

 

  • For decades, inappropriate IRS behaviors have been revealed. Each time, the agency has assured the public that it takes these breaches “very seriously.”

 

Advertisements

I have for several years now received newsletters from one of the few and wonderful conservative colleges left in our country:  Hillsdale College.  They are offering a new FREE on-line course  in American history that I certainly plan to take and you may also want to follow.  The information is below.  BB

( From an email to me from Hillsdale College)  I’m Larry Arnn, president of Hillsdale College, and your teacher for the first of the ten classes that make up the course. I’m eager to tell you more about this important and timely series, being offered online for the FIRST TIME – For Free!

High Praise for Hillsdale's Constitution<br />
courses from across AmericaBut first, here’s an interesting little test for you: Which President said the following? (HINT: It was during his Second Inaugural Address.)

” . . . each time we gather to inaugurate a president, we bear witness to the enduring strength of our Constitution.

“What makes us exceptional, what makes us America is our allegiance to an idea articulated in a declaration . . . We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, and among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

“The patriots of 1776 did not fight to replace the tyranny of a king with the privileges of a few, or the rule of a mob. They gave to us a republic, a government of, and by, and for the people. Entrusting each generation to keep safe our founding creed . . . ”
Who comes to mind: Jefferson?Lincoln? Reagan? 

Actually it’s none of the above. It wasBarack Obama.

Surprised? I was too.

How can a President of the United States use phrases like “unalienable rights” and government “of, by, and for the people,” when all of his actions point away from a republic of liberty, and toward bureaucratic despotism?

President Obama’s policies – from Obamacare, to higher taxes and runaway debt, to increased regulation of the economy and of family life – are in direct contradiction to these words in his second inaugural address.

President Obama can only get away with misusing the words of America’s founders because too many Americans today have not been properly educated about our American Heritage.

And if this is allowed to continue, our great nation will become less free and less prosperous, and the intrusive bureaucratic state will expand.

To steer our nation in the right direction, Americans must once again be educated for liberty. That is why I implore you to take these two steps right now:

1. Register for our new American Heritage course RIGHT NOW

The Heritage Action Committee is very busy recruiting people who will stand firm for Conservative values.  You may find this article interesting and especially the list of Senators and Representatives who have passed the test and are considered Heritage Sentinels.

I would also highly recommend to any who did not see FOXNEWS Hannity 9:00 pm either Friday or Sunday night go to his site and watch  the show on “Boomtown, America”  Washington DC is in another universe compared to the rest of the country and it is all on the backs of us tax payers in America.   Washington produces NOTHING!  and yet it is the wealthiest city in the United States and produces “millionaires and billionaires” by the gross yearly.   How is this possible?  Why are so many becoming super rich in DC?   We all know the fraud and corruption that rules Washington but even I had no idea it was so bad.  I guess this is why I like knowing there are Congress people who are not corrupted.  Unfortunately however these people have trouble getting things done because they are outnumbered by the corrupted Congress people and are kept from the corrupted leadership from influence postings.  They are however gaining in number and are at our backs.  Remember  that 2014 is just around the corner and another opportunity to add to their numbers.   BB

 

Capitol Building

CONSERVATIVE SENTINELS STAND GUARD FOR FREEDOM

CATEGORY: Driving The DayFeatured     KEYWORDS: Conservative Principles,HouseSenate
 |JANUARY 29, 2013

Sentinel: A person stationed as a guard to prevent a surprise attack.

This week we announced the 29 members of Congress — 6 Senators and 23 Representatives — who achieved Sentinel status by scoring a 90% or higher on our legislative scorecard in the 112th Congress.  These Sentinels are a critical component of conservative successes, representing the “tip of the spear in Washington.”

Heritage Action CEO Michael A. Needham praised the work of these lawmakers:

Americans worried about our country’s future should sleep better at night knowing a dedicated group of lawmakers are fighting for freedom every day in Washington.  We congratulate these Sentinels who stood guard, vigilantly protecting our freedoms during the 112th Congress.  Not only did they advance the conservative cause, but they also held back the incessant tide of tax increases, out-of-control spending, and harmful policies that breed dependency on government.  In Washington, this is no easy task, which makes these Members all the more commendable.

Congressional Sentinels are not alone in their fight for freedom.

Washington’s corrosive, corrupting nature can challenge the principles of many conservative lawmakers, which is why the Heritage Action’s citizen Sentinels do the “hard work of keeping Congress accountable.”

The Washington Post has certainly taken notice of our impact in Washington, as have liberals, conservatives, politicians, and others in the media.  We have no qualms about confronting lawmakers head on, regardless of their party, if they are not upholding conservative principles.

The Post piece suggests that this is one reason why we have been able to “gain a bigger following among conservative activists” than other institutions.  They add that we’ve given “activists a new sense of legitimacy and an institutional base.”  In fact, Ginny Quaglia, a Sentinel from North Carolina said, “If you try to debate an issue and you cite as your source Heritage Action, it gives you instant credibility.”

Conservatives now have the formula for success – unifying conservative forces inside and outside the beltway.  Citizen Sentinels recognize this and our allies in Congress – especially those who have achieved Sentinel status — believe thatHeritage Action “adds institutional heft and sharp elbows to their own cause.”  Thus, we congratulate all of our Sentinels for their commitment and hard work.

Press Release: Heritage Action Announces Congressional Sentinels

See the scorecard: Heritage Action Scorecard

Senate Sentinels (6):

Jim DeMint  (R-SC) 99%
Mike Lee (R-UT) 99%
Rand Paul (R-KY) 96%
Marco Rubio (R-FL) 96%
Ron Johnson (R-WI) 94%
Orrin Hatch (R-UT) 91%

 

House Sentinels (23):

Jeff Duncan (R-SC) 97%
Jeff Flake (R-AZ) 97%
Trent Franks (R-AZ) 97%
Tom Graves (R-GA) 97%
Paul Broun  (R-GA) 96%
Jim Jordan (R-OH) 95%
Mick Mulvaney (R-SC) 95%
Trey Gowdy (R-SC) 94%
Doug Lamborn  (R-CO) 94%
David Schweikert (R-AZ) 94%
Jeff Miller (R-FL)  93%
Ben Quayle (R-AZ) 93%
Joe Wilson (R-SC) 93%
Joe Walsh (R-IL) 93%
Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) 92%
Louie Gohmert (R-TX) 92%
Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) 92%
Dennis Ross (R-FL) 92%
Justin Amash (R-MI) 91%
Michele Bachmann (R-MN) 91%
John Fleming (R-LA) 90%
Scott Garrett (R-NJ) 90%
Marlin Stutzman (R-IN) 90%

COMMUNICATIONS DEPUTY

 @KathMaryRosario

Newsletter from  ACT for AMERICA.

August 14, 2012

This couldn’t happen here, could it?

Dear Lew and Brenda,

Yes it could—and is.

In fact, the title of the article below (highlights added), posted at the Gatestone Institute website, could just as easily be “How Political Correctness is Transforming American Education.” 

To find just one example, click here to check out the report we released earlier this year, “Education or Indoctrination: The Treatment of Islam in 6ththrough 12th Grade American Textbooks.”

You’ll learn that the typical textbook fails to note that the 9/11 terrorists were radical Muslims and fails to inform students that the state of Israel was created by a UN resolution in 1947.

Most of what is mentioned below is already beginning to happen in America. For example, a couple years ago students at a Boston-area middle school were taken on a field trip to a mosque. The boys were invited to kneel and pray while teachers stood by and did nothing. Can you imagine the outcry from faculty and the ACLU if this had happened at a Christian church?


How Political Correctness Is Transforming British Education

by Soeren Kern
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3170/british-education-political-correctness#.UAQtSmOuuGk.facebook

In Cheshire, two students at the Alsager High School were punished by their teacher for refusing to pray to Allah as part of their religious education class.

In Scotland, 30 non-Muslim children from the Parkview Primary School recently were required to visit the Bait ur Rehman Ahmadiyya mosque in the Yorkhill district of Glasgow (videos here and here). At the mosque, the children were instructed to recite the shahada, the Muslim declaration of faith which states: “There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger.” Muslims are also demanding that Islamic preachers be sent to every school in Scotland to teach children about Islam, ostensibly in an effort to end negative attitudes about Muslims.

British schools are increasingly dropping the Jewish Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, according to a report entitled, Teaching Emotive and Controversial History, commissioned by the Department for Education and Skills.

British teachers are also reluctant to discuss the medieval Crusades, in which Christians fought Muslim armies for control of Jerusalem: lessons often contradict what is taught in local mosques.

In an effort to counter “Islamophobia” in British schools, teachers now are required to teach “key Muslim contributions such as Algebra and the number zero” in math and science courses, even though the concept of zero originated in India.

In the East London district of Tower Hamlets, four Muslims were recently jailed for attacking a local white teacher who gave religious studies lessons to Muslim girls; and 85 out of 90 schools have implemented “no pork” policies.

Schools across Britain are, in fact, increasingly banning pork from lunch menus to avoid offending Muslim students. Hundreds of schools have adopted a “no pork” policy, according to a recent report by the London-based Daily Telegraph.

The culinary restrictions join a long list of politically correct changes that gradually are bringing hundreds of British primary and secondary education into conformity with Islamic Sharia law.

The London Borough of Haringey, a heavily Muslim district in North London, is the latest school district to switch to a menu that is fully halal (religiously permissible for Muslims).

The Haringey Town Council recently issued “best practice” advice to all schools in its area to “ban all pork products in order to cater for the needs of staff and pupils who are not permitted contact with these for religious reasons.”

Local politicians have criticized the new policy as pandering to Muslims, and local farmers, who have pointed out that all schools in Britain already offer vegetarian options, have accused school administrators of depriving non-Muslim children of a choice.

Following an outcry from non-Muslim parents, the town council removed the guidance from its website, although the new policy remains in place.

At the Cypress Junior School, in Croydon, south London, school administrators announced in the school newsletter dated June 1, 2012 that the school has opted for a pork-free menu “as a result of pupil and parental feedback.”

The announcement states: “Whilst beef, chicken, turkey and fish will all feature, as well as the daily vegetarian and jacket potato or pasta option, the sausages served will now be chicken rather than pork.”

In Luton, an industrial city some 50 kilometers (30 miles) north of London where more than 15% of the population is now Muslim, 23 out of 57 schools have banned pork.

In the City of Bradford, a borough of West Yorkshire in Northern England where there are now twice as many practicing Muslims that there are practicing Anglicans, 24 out of 160 schools have eliminated pork from their menus. In Newham (East London), 25 out of 75 schools have banned pork.

Other pork-free schools include Cranford Park Primary School in Hayes (Middlesex), and Dog Kennel Hill Primary in East Dulwich (South London).

The Borough of Harrow in northwest London was among the first in Britain to encourage halal menus. In 2010, Harrow Council announced plans to ban pork in the borough’s 52 state primary schools, following a switch by ten secondary schools to offer halal-only menus.

According to the UK-based National Pig Association, which represents commercial pork producers, “It is disappointing that schools cannot be sufficiently organized to give children a choice of meat. Sausages and roast pork are staples of a British diet and children enjoy eating them. If products can be labeled with warnings that they contain nuts and vegetarian dishes can be made and kept separate from meat dishes, [we] don’t see why the same can’t apply to pork.”

Lunch menus are not the only area in which “cultural sensitivity” is escalating in British schools.

In West Yorkshire, the Park Road Junior Infant and Nursery School in Batley has banned stories featuring pigs, including “The Three Little Pigs,” in case they offend Muslim children.

In Nottingham, the Greenwood Primary School cancelled a Christmas nativity play; it interfered with the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha. In Scarborough, the Yorkshire Coast College removed the words Christmas and Easter from their calendar not to offend Muslims.

Also in Cheshire, a 14-year-old Roman Catholic girl who attends Ellesmere Port Catholic High School was branded a truant by teachers for refusing to dress like a Muslim and visit a mosque.

In Stoke-on-Trent, schools have been ordered to rearrange exams, cancel swimming lessons and stop sex education during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. In Norwich, theKnowland Grove Community First School has axed the traditional Christmas play to “look at some of the other great cultural festivals of the world.”

Meanwhile, the politically correct ban on pigs in Britain also extends to toys for children. A toy farm set called HappyLand Goosefeather Farm recently removed pigs in order to avoid offending Muslims.

The pig removal came to public attention after a British mother bought the toy as a present for her daughter’s first birthday. Although the set contained a model of a cow, sheep, chicken, horse and dog, there was no pig, despite there being a sty and a button which generated an “oink” sound.

After the mother complained, the Early Learning Centre (ELC), which manufactures the toy, responded: “Previously the pig was part of the Goosefeather Farm. However due to customer feedback and religious reasons this is no longer part of the farm.”

After a public outcry, however, ELC later reversed its decision: “We recognize that pigs are familiar farm animals, especially for our UK customers. We have taken the decision to reinstate the pig and to no longer sell the set in international markets where it might create an issue.”

For two years now I have been screaming from these pages about LOST   (Law of the Seas Treaty)    the United Nations treaty to take America away from Americans.  President Obama of course has been mucho behind this as have a great many other Democrats who hate America.   (If you need more information on LOST please see my topic cloud at the bottom of the right hand column for my articles and references. )  anyhow, the Conservatives won and Lost was as the headline says SUNK! Thank  God and We the People who have  made the phone calls and emails and letters to put pressure on to defeat this monster again in Congress.   But please don’t make the mistake of forgetting it because just as it has raised it nasty head before this with other Presidents it will come again.  Evil does not die and neither doses it go away; the United Nations is EVIL.

From the Heritage Action for America Newsletter:

Conservative Pressure Sinks LOST
Brenda,It’s official. Thanks to conservatives, the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) is effectively sunk.For months, conservatives across the country have been calling and emailing their Senators in an effort to push them to oppose this UN treaty. Since then, a steady stream of Senators have come out in opposition to the dangerously-flawed treaty.

>> See which Senators stood strong and opposed LOST.

Thanks to the dedication of conservatives like you, thousands of phone calls went into offices of the Senators who had not yet signed onto the letter. And thanks to those calls, the final six Senators needed to stop the treaty indicated their opposition.

>> Find out which Senators are standing up for America’s sovereignty.

President Obama and Senator John Kerry tried to hand over America’s sovereignty, but because of the hard work of grassroots conservatives like you, our nation and economic  future are more secure.

From the whole Heritage Action team, we want to thank you for standing up for sovereignty and convincing your Senators to oppose this treaty.

Sincerely,

Michael A. Needham
Chief Executive Officer
Heritage Action for America

P.S. The support of conservative Americans has been critical in this fight. Learn how you can be a part of supporting Heritage Action as we continue to fight conservative battles.

 

 

If you read my previous post you se that I feel Chief Justice Roberts did the People a favor with his ruling on Obamacare.  I seem to be very much in the minority in my thinking,  especially up against such brilliant people as Mark Levin who is  all but ready to call Roberts out as a traitor to his country.  But  The Project to Restore America  newsletter this month seems to see things my way.   Check out what they have to say:  (BB)

Obamacare Survives, but Political Playing Field Has Changed
By Michael Barone
Monday, July 02, 2012

The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision upholding the Obama administration’s health care legislation was a victory for the president, his administration and his party. Their most ambitious legislative achievement has not been nullified, and they are not left in obvious disarray. 

But it is only a partial victory and in some ways not a victory at all, both in the short run electorally and in the long run in terms of the constitutional order. 

Politically Obamacare, as its critics call it, remains highly unpopular. It’s possible that the court decision will boost its support, but unlikely. 

Most voters want this law repealed. Mitt Romney and the Republicans want to repeal it. Barack Obama and the Democrats want to preserve it. It’s not a winning issue for the incumbent. 

Constitutionally, many conservatives are unhappy that Chief Justice Roberts and the four justices generally considered liberal voted to uphold the mandate to buy health insurance as a tax, which Congress is clearly empowered to levy. 

But the fact remains that a majority of five justices, including Roberts, also declared that Congress’ power to regulate commerce does not authorize a mandate to buy a commercial product. This will tend to bar further expansion of the size and scope of the federal government. 

Moreover, the Constitution’s limits on congressional power have now become, for the first time in seven decades, a political issue. They’re likely to remain one for years to come. 

This would not have been true had not the constitutional case against the mandate been advanced by Washington lawyer David Rivkin, Georgetown law professor Randy Barnett and many others. 

They did not quite prevail in the Supreme Court, but they changed not only the legal but also the political debate in a way almost no one anticipated three years ago. 

Unhappy conservatives grumble that Congress can get around the declaration that a mandate is beyond Congress’s enumerated powers by labeling it a tax — or just by relying on five justices declaring it one. 

But there’s usually a political price to pay for increasing taxes. That’s why Barack Obama swore up and down that the mandate was not a tax. It’s why Democratic congressional leaders did not call it one. 

Roberts’ decision undercuts such arguments, now and in the future. Members of Congress supporting such legislation will be held responsible, this year and for years to come, for increasing taxes. 

And the Constitution’s provision that tax bills must be originated in the House of Representatives means that the party controlling the House can effectively block such measures. That will be an argument for Republican congressional candidates for the indefinite future. 

It should not be forgotten that the Supreme Court did overturn part of the Obamacare legislation, the provision allowing the federal government to cut off states from all Medicaid funding if they refuse to vastly expand Medicaid eligibility as the legislation requires. 

Here, another novel legal argument, advanced by Vanderbilt law professor (and my law school classmate) James Blumstein, found favor with a majority of justices. The idea is that Congress can’t use the leverage of partial federal funding to force the states to increase the size and scope of government. 

This seems like a principle that could work powerfully against big government policies. Medicaid has been vastly expanded over the years in this manner. Now the Court seems to be saying that that game is over

The court’s decision elicited sighs of relief from the White House. The president’s entire administration is not in disarray. 

But the basic assumptions that he brought to office have proven unwarranted. Obama followed the New Deal historians in portraying history as a story of progress from minimal government to big government and in arguing that economic distress would make Americans more supportive of big government policies. 

The unpopularity of Obamacare and the stimulus package have proven the latter assumption wrong. Most Americans are skeptical about the supposedly guaranteed benefits of centralized big government programs. 

And history does not move in one direction toward big government, even if it did from 1929 to 1945. Mercantilism was replaced by free trade in the 19th century, New Deal regulation by deregulation in the 1970s and 1980s. 

The Supreme Court’s decision, while upholding Obamacare, tilts the legal and political playing field away from big government more than anyone anticipated three years ago, and probably for years to come. 


Michael Barone, senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner (www.washingtonexaminer.com), is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel contributor and a co-author of The Almanac of American Politics. 

COPYRIGHT 2012 THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Once again, thank you for sending us your e-mails. We can’t respond individually, but we read and consider all of them. Send your question, comment, or complaint tojohn@theprojecttorestoreamerica.com orwendy@theprojecttorestoreamerica.com

 Hello! I just read the article below: 

Why I Escaped From New York and Californiaby Wayne Allyn Root, Wednesday, June 27, 2012. I want to be able to post it on facebook! Please add a share button! – Marita 

Bidwell comment: Marita, if you go to www.theprojecttorestoreamerica.com, this article is under the Recent Articles. When you click the link, the article fills the screen. At the top right of the page, the Facebook icon is with the other Share this site icons. I hope this helps…

Also if you liked Wayne Allyn Root’s article, you might like this one as well… http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/06/25/to-defeat-obama-in-2012-tell-story-chicago-decline/

 (On Stansberry Radio,) I think that Chris Martinsen was more persuasive on peak oil because he built his argument on the fact that oil on this planet is a limited resource. We are not likely to burn up all the oil because it will eventually become cheaper to manufacture a different type of portable energy. You have a good point that enhanced recovery methods will push production out into the future, but the decline will inevitably kick in and apply pressure for innovation. The stakes are high to keep our transportation systems running, I hope innovation wins. Thanks, Mike 

Heffern comment: If you enjoyed the last radio show we recommended (the overwhelming positive feedback assures me that you did) tune in to the interview with a former Managing Partner at Bain Capital, Ed Conrad. This interview is one that I’d put near the top of my list. Porter Stansberry and Aaron Brabham interviewed a close business associate and friend of Mitt Romney’s, Conard talks in great detail about the benefits of rising income inequality, true facts about the economy, and the noble profession of private equity. Conard is a great debater and an extremely smart man.

I’d recommend making this podcast part of your weekly routine. A great thing about the radio show is they have a feedback line where you can leave messages for the hosts directly… They always love to hear listener feedback on any aspect of the show or ideas on who you would want interviewed next… 1-855-SA-RADIO (1-855-727-2346) orfeedback@stansberryradio.com.

Here are some very good articles from Project to Restore America that I thought you might want to read.    I would especially point out the three articles :

Warning: Three signs point to an extreme development in gold and crude oil
“The groundwork is being laid for major events… I would recommend protecting yourself accordingly…”

 MUST-READ: The biggest Federal Reserve “money printing” in history could be coming soon
“The Fed has been playing a very, very dangerous game…”
 Jim Rogers: Coming U.S. “fiscal cliff” is “very, very dire”
“I assure you the economy is going to slow down and slow down a lot…”

in light of what happened this past week.  FOX BUSINESS NEWS had several guest  commentators and economist this past Thursday and Friday who were  adamant that a big fall into another recession (depression really!) is coming and coming very soon.  These articles  seem to echo what they were predicting.

The first article features is by John Stossel.  John is a Libertarian and in many ways I lean in that direction because what he says just plain makes sense.  He is on a tour promoting his newest book “No they Can’t”  about the failure of government programs and on the tour is visiting many colleges and universities.  I was  gratified to see that several colleges are actually using Stossel’s TV broadcast in teaching economic truths.  Unfortunately these are small colleges and universities with down to earth people and not the big liberal/progressive communist control schools we hear so much about.  I went to one of these small down to earth colleges thank goodness, but when I began teaching i was swamped by those who had been indoctrinated.  BB

Keeping Business Honest
By John Stossel
Friday, June 01, 2012

Instinctively, we look for people’s motives. We need to know whom we can trust and whom we can’t. We’re especially skeptical of business because we know business wants our money.

It took me too long to understand that business’s desire for profit is a good thing. To get our money, businesses — if they can’t look to the government for favors — need to give us what we want. Then they must make continuous improvements and do it better than the competition does.

That competition is enough to protect consumers. But that’s not intuitive. It’s intuitive to assume that competition isn’t really consumer protection and that experts at the FDA, FTC, DEA, FCC, CPSC, OSHA and so on must protect us. These experts consult “responsible” businessmen for advice on creating rules to make sure businesses meets minimum “standards.” 

Unfortunately, this standardization stops innovation.

We are imprinted to be wary of newcomers, strangers. Newcomers by definition are less experienced. Maybe they’ll do something unsafe or dishonest! We don’t want government to stop them from doing business — we just want consumers protected! Governments claim to do that by licensing businesses.

People like the idea of licensing. We license drivers. We license dogs. It seems prudent. People naively think this government seal of approval makes us safer.

This naiveté is used to justify all sorts of rules that kill competition.

Las Vegas regulators require anyone who wants to start a limousine business to prove his new business is needed and, worse, will not “adversely affect other carriers.” But every new business intends to beat its competitors. That’s the point. Competition is good for us. Las Vegas’ anticompetitive licensing rules mean limo customers pay more.

In Nashville, Tenn., regulators ruled it illegal for a limo to charge less than $45 a ride. One entrepreneur had won customers by charging half that, but the new regulations mean the established car service businesses no longer have to worry about him.

Perhaps Nashville’s and Vegas’ regulators really believe “this is an area where the free market doesn’t work,” as the manager of the Nevada Transportation Services Authority put it. But it’s fishy that charging big fees for licenses just happens to be a very effective shakedown operation.

Vegas cab and limousine businesses give “substantial” donations to Vegas-area political candidates, according to the Las Vegas Sun.

Our big government has justified its existence (at least since the Progressive Era) by claiming it is a “countervailing influence” to corporate power — when it is, in fact, incestuously entwined with corporations.

The list of business activities that government insists on licensing, supposedly for our sake, includes hair braiders in Mississippi, wooden-casket makers and florists in Louisiana and even yoga instructors in Virginia.

Established businesses always try to use government to handcuff competition. When margarine was first developed, the dairy industry got Wisconsin legislators to pass a law making margarine illegal. Several states ruled that margarine was “deceptive,” since it might be mistaken for butter. Some required a bright pink dye be added to make margarine look different. An “oleomargarine bootlegger” was thrown in the U.S. Penitentiary at Leavenworth.

When supermarkets were invented, small grocers tried to ban them. “A&P will dominate the grocery business and destroy Main Street,” the grocers claimed. Minnesota legislators responded by passing a law that forbade supermarkets to put food “on sale.” 

Established capitalists are often capitalism’s biggest enemies.

I used to believe that licensing doctors and lawyers protected consumers, but now I realize that licensing is always an expensive restraint of trade. It certainly hasn’t barred quacks and shysters.

Licensing is unnecessary. It creates a false sense of security, raises costs, stifles innovation and takes away consumer choice.


The irony is, these readers were using a strategy that doesn’t require you to buy a single stock, bond, or option upfront to make this money. How is this possible? 
 
Click here for details.
————————————-

I don’t deny that there is fraud in business. I won Emmys for exposing it. Fraud is one of three crimes that must be policed and punished for the market to function (theft and physical assault are the others). Once that’s done, however, as long as there is open competition, honesty pretty much takes care of itself.

Free competition — the striving for a good reputation — protects consumers better than government ever will.

John Stossel is host of “Stossel” on the Fox Business Network. He’s the author of “Give Me a Break” and of “Myth, Lies, and Downright Stupidity.” To find out more about John Stossel, visit his site at http://www.johnstossel.com. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com

COPYRIGHT 2012 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS, INC. DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM 

Once again, thank you for sending us your e-mails. We can’t respond individually, but we read and consider all of them. Send your question, comment, or complaint tojohn@theprojecttorestoreamerica.com orwendy@theprojecttorestoreamerica.com.

 One of the never mentioned aspects of taxing the rich or those who are more successful at earning money is that by doing so you relinquish the foundational principles of equality under the law and our Constitution. Why should one person who earns a large sum be treated any differently than one who earns little? They are each only one person. To use the lame brained argument of the left. Taxing one man/woman more than another is unfair. – Peter 

Heffern comment: This is a good point. The numbers from the Census Bureau show taxing individuals not only undermines the principles outlined in the Constitution, but also creates an entitlement culture. For instance, according to the first-quarter 2011 Census Bureau figures (the most recent data available), nearly half of all Americans live in a household getting a government check. Fifteen percent of Americans live in a household on food stamps. Twenty six percent of households have someone enrolled in Medicaid, two percent have someone getting unemployment benefits, sixteen percent have someone receiving Social Security benefits, and fifteen percent have someone enrolled in Medicare.

 [I] believe income taxes, even a flat 20%, are immoral. It is why property taxes are immoral. It creates a system where those who achieve and earn more essentially get punished for having done so. I realize government service is nebulous, and that many people believe we should help those less fortunate, but that is always an individual choice. If you hire an accountant, such as I, you will request a fee for service. That fee will be fairly close to the same fee for the same service that anyone else would try to negotiate for my services. That’s how the market works: Same thing at the grocery store where you pay the same amount for a loaf of bread as do I. Nobody cares how much you make. You and I the customers compete for those loaves of bread and pay a price commensurate with the store’s ability to supply the bread. – Jeff 

Bidwell comment: Jeff, I understand your argument. However, according to the Constitution, the U.S. government is also supposed to provide infrastructure and national security. Mind you, national security should be more intelligence-focused than on creating bureaucratic departments like the Department for Homeland Security.

Our infrastructure needs to continue to evolve in these modern times, so I support some taxes even though none would be really nice. Consider a current situation… Americans for Prosperity is putting pressure on lawmakers in the form of a phone campaign to tell elected officials to oppose tax increases to pay for the new Silver Line. I agree there should be no tax increases for this train that would connect Washington, D.C. to Dulles International Airport, which is probably much-needed. However, if everyone kept 80% of their income, we should be able to invest in new trains like this. This demonstrates that our government uses Americans’ tax dollars to focus on initiatives outside what the government was intended to focus on while ignoring what it should handle.  

recent articles

Why Scott Rasmussen is optimistic the political class will surrender…
By Wendy Bidwell
Thursday, May 31, 2012
“I think the situation we’re in today was brought about because a political class pursued their own agenda. They ignored voters, they misled voters, they have understated the deficit.” — Scott Rasmussen
Political Responsibility and the Public Loss of Confidence in the Government
By Takashi Shiraishi
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
The revolt of the regions and the formation of new national political groupings are important developments for Japanese politics. But they will not bring about an immediate restoration of popular confidence in the political system. The only way to restore confidence is for the government to produce results.
Can we solve this with more freedom?
By Penn Jillette
Friday, May 25, 2012
It is important to “tell the truth as you see it.” What do I believe, what is in my heart? Only when you are open to new information are you able to then open other people’s eyes to the real issues.
Oklahomans Embrace Income-Tax Cuts, Spending Cuts
By Pat McFerron
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Overall, a slight majority of Oklahomans favor a 10-year phaseout (51 percent favor vs. 30 percent oppose).
Why Would an Obstetrician from Oklahoma Run for Senate? Tom Coburn Explains…
By Wendy Bidwell
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
John Adams warned that democracies never last long. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide. So how do we cheat history so that we don’t go in the dustbin of history of other democracies as we wander away from this wonderful freedom we’ve been given? Or diminish it… And with that, diminish our opportunity.
classics

Tuesday, May 29, 2012
 Warning: Three signs point to an extreme development in gold and crude oil
“The groundwork is being laid for major events… I would recommend protecting yourself accordingly…”
Friday, May 25, 2012
 MUST-READ: The biggest Federal Reserve “money printing” in history could be coming soon
“The Fed has been playing a very, very dangerous game…”
Thursday, May 31, 2012
 Jim Rogers: Coming U.S. “fiscal cliff” is “very, very dire”
“I assure you the economy is going to slow down and slow down a lot…”
Thursday, May 31, 2012
 DISGUSTING: This outrageous story on Greece and the euro crisis left us speechless
You may want to sit down before reading…
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
 Gold could be on the verge of a “waterfall event”
The next big move in gold could soon begin…

See topic cloud at bottom of page for specific topics.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 97 other followers

BB’s file cabinet

Advertisements