September 30. 2008
Alert #29: Aloha Liberty Dollar

Now I am not usually a doom-and-gloom guy. I developed the Liberty Dollar to bring a real solution to the currency situation that I realized in 1974… some 34 years ago! And for all these years I have strived to bring about a proven, positive, peaceful and profitable solution to our country’s controlled fiat monetary system.

And while I greatly appreciated your support (ala the Choir), at almost every turn there has been an invisible force that has thwarted the Liberty Dollar development and larger use. At first you may think, I mean the government. That is not the case. The government had been amazingly supportive up until the raid. The most disturbing “invisible force” is bunch of traitors who confess to have the very ideals that you think they endorse. Unfortunately, most of the time I found our supposed “leaders” to be vain little men, who were much more interested in maintaining their position than saving the country.

Who are these traitors who have steadfastfully blocked or secretly worked to undermine the Liberty Dollar and its ideals? Well over the years I have made several lists, but I am now on Tour and time has long dulled that list… but it is easy to list a few and you may know a few more from your own efforts with the Liberty Dollar.

List of Bellybuttons:
Lew Rockwell, Von Mises Institute
Mark Skousen, Newsletter
Bill Bonner, Agora Publishing
Addison Wiggin, Newsletter
John McManus, John Birch Society
Ed Crane, Cato Institute
Jack Pugsley, Sovereign Society
Vin Suprynowicz, Las Vegas reporter
Charley Reese, Orlando reporter
Sheldon Richman, writer
Doug Casey, Newsletter
Franklin Sanders, Moneychanger-my-ass
Jim Cook, Investment Rarities
Peymon Mottahedeh, Freedom Law School
Ron Paul, Politician

I contacted every one of these bellybuttons. Each had the opportunity to really advance the ideals of liberty but didn’t. They are liars and traitors to the ideals that you may think they support. I would never trust any of them. None will address the issues or even state their objections to the Liberty Dollar. Most will not even reply. A few have said I don’t like them because they would not endorse the Liberty Dollar. Hell, I have never asked for an endorsement from anyone and don’t care if someone endorses the Liberty Dollar or not. But I brand these traitors as bellybuttons because they stonewall, back stab and take adverse positions against the Liberty Dollar while publicly stating that they support the very same ideals but refuse to enter a discourse to move a viable solution forward.

As a student of Austrian Economics, I was particularly drawn to the Mises Institute so I made an appointment to meet Lew Lockwell. When the day finally arrived, his secretary kept me waiting for an hour, then he stood me up and had me forcibly evicted into a driving Alabama rainstorm without a car. Nice business manners, eh?! For that and ten years of behind-the-scenes of negativity, I name Prickwell king bellybutton of the government controlled opposition. Skousen, Bonner, McManus, Crane and Casey are not far behind. Be very careful of whom you ask advice. If you have any doubts, just ask this list of American traitors, because I have and they all made me sick.

Contrary to these lying bellybutton traitors, there have been a great many “ordinary Joes” who have exemplified the greatness of our original Founding Fathers. These men and women have won my heart, not because they support the Liberty Dollar, but because they have devoted their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to furthering the ideals as represented by the Liberty Dollar.

I don’t know what happened at his appointment nor do we know why he’s pissed at the rest of those listed but I’m not getting the feeling that it was anything to garner this kind of response. In my opinion the Liberty Dollar little more than a scam. Selling a one troy ounce silver round for $50 is 3.66 times the spot price of $13.64 (bought in 50 to 100 troy oz batch) at the time of writing. They then attempt to use the $50 face valued coin as if it was worth as much as a $50 FRN. As the cost of silver rose so did the profit margin when it was re-minted with a higher face value. It is no wonder that these individuals didn’t want to associate themselves with von NotHaus and the Liberty Dollar. It’s obviously of questionable legality (not that any of those listed agree with that status but they likely don’t want to be directly affiliated with that) and it questionable morally too. If someone wishes to invest in metals the Liberty Dollar is a complete waste of money and if you wish to use metals as a currency or barter buying generic rounds is not only significantly cheaper but it doesn’t have the legal issues. Those “ordinary Joes”, of which I know a few personally, who are RCOs or are purchasers and users of the Liberty Dollars were suckered into a pyramid scheme.

The idea is right but the implementation is just too off to be an honest business.

http://www.bloomberg.com/…

U.S. lawmakers said they made a breakthrough in talks on a $700 billion plan to revive the credit markets and expect to announce an agreement on legislation later today. Negotiators resolved “our differences so we can go forward with a package to stabilize the market,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters when talks at the Capitol ended after midnight Washington time.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said the proposed deal “will work and be effective” in the marketplace. More work needs to be done, “but I think we’re there,” he said.

Bush spokesman Tony Fratto said early this morning that administration officials are “pleased with the progress tonight and appreciate the bipartisan effort to stabilize our financial markets and protect our economy.”

Senator Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat who chairs the Budget Committee, said $250 billion would be immediately available and another $100 billion could be used when requested by the president for debt purchases. Congress could bar the expenditure of the remaining $350 billion only by passing a resolution to block it from being spent.

The package includes a provision aimed at “preventing golden parachutes” for executives of companies who leave firms that have sold troubled assets to the government, Conrad said.

Companies that sell debt to the government will issue stock warrants to the government so that taxpayers “can gain as companies recover” from economic difficulties, Conrad said.

A proposal that would allow judges to modify mortgage terms for struggling borrowers in bankruptcy proceedings wasn’t included, said Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat. “We pushed very hard” for the bankruptcy provision, “but we feel we got good foreclosure mitigation language in there,” Dodd said.

Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama said the plan “appears to embrace” his principles that the legislation include oversight by an independent board; protections for taxpayers to ensure they receive any profits; measures to help homeowners stay in their homes; and rules to make sure “CEOs are not being rewarded at taxpayers’ expense.”

“There were a series of breakthroughs here in the end” and the agreement on executive compensation “was certainly the most important,” Conrad said. He declined to give further details because the language being drafted by lawyers is “quite complicated.”

Taxpayers will not see a dime of any possible profits… the GOVERNMENT will. What Mr. Obama means is he will be less likely to tax the shit out of us if the happen to make a few pennies from this ‘deal.’ Which is highly unlikely. It really hits home I hope, especially after reading below, that these politicians are not representatives of the people. They represent big business and the elite. It has always been like that and always will. The potential the government has due to its assumed role is a incredible draw on those who would like to use that power for their own interests. It is an inherently flawed system and no ammount of wishful thinking or “getting in the right guy” will fix it.

Read More…

http://www.lewrockwell.com/…

It’s long been my contention that if the demonrats would just jettison the relatively small elitist wing of their party–the condescending limousine liberals, the middle-America and normalcy-hating “urbane” and cosmpolitan condescending types–and just have a mildly populist, redistributionist, soft-socialist but culturally conservative platform, they could clean house and recapture all the inexplicably Republican Joe Sixpack types who are their natural constituency (but who are alienated by Barbra Streisand’s screeching). (See my How the Democrats Could Win.) But their stupidity knows no bounds. Why they need to anchor their image to the vapid Hollywood and libertine types is beyond me. Apparently abortion is all that matters to them.

Their inexplicable self-destructive behavior is on fully display in their reaction to the Sarah Palin VP nomination. A few choice quotes and examples below:

As I noted here, after Hillary Clinton’s speech during the Democrat convention, Susan Estrich admitted that because of female demonrat disappointment over Hillary’s loss to Obama, if McCain just picks a woman VP, “it’s Cha-Ching” (i.e., he’ll rack up many female votes that otherwise could have gone to Obama). So, she said, “As a democrat, I hope McCain doesn’t pick a woman VP.” So she wanted McCain to discriminate against women. Nice.

In this post on HuffPo, David Sirota explains why Palin “is a pretty smart choice”:

1. Putting a woman on the ticket is McCain’s best hope to peel off some disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters

2. Palin comes from an energy state, and specifically, an oil and gas state. With Democrats’ pathetically (yet predictably) tepid behavior on the drilling issue, the GOP senses an opportunity to exploit it, and you can bet Palin will be making the drilling case, with first-person narratives and anecdotes.

3. It will be difficult — though not impossible — for the Obama campaign to make an experience argument against Palin. Even though Palin is probably the most inexperienced candidate for vice president in contemporary American history, the Republicans have spent months attacking Obama’s supposed lack of experience. So when gnats like Rahm Emanuel issue silly, over-the-top press releases about Palin’s career, they re-open an experience debate that John McCain probably wants to have with Obama.

4. As the Nation’s Chris Hayes reports, Palin is a die-hard right-winger who could help McCain solidify the Republican base.

Sirota fails to mention, however, another important factor: the condescending the way the left is sure to react–is already reacting–belittling normalcy, middle class, “beauty queens,” “small” states is also going to hurt them.

A good example of liberal condescension (and hypocritically sexist, at that) from Jane Smiley: “If the red phone rings in the middle of the night and she’s breastfeeding, will she answer it?” The contempt for normal America–the bizarre, sneering sexism–just oozes out of this liberal vitriol, doesn’t it? Think middle America won’t pick on up on this? Why vote for those who feel they are superior to you and who relegate normalcy to peon status?

And another, by “Michael Seitzman”:”She’s never actually used the word Shiite in a sentence before. She’s never had to. She’s never given any thought whatsoever to nuclear proliferation. She’s never had to. She’s never thought about Israel, Russia, Korea, or Iran. She’s never even thought about Mexico.”

How in the world does he know? He’s implying that unless you are a federal politician, or some savvy DC Denizen, you haven’t “thought” about …. Russia, Korea, etc. Hell, even mere state governors are peons and not worthy to sit at the table with the benighted Beltwaytarians–if you are only governor of “small state”, that is. Gee, I wonder what citizens of, say, most states outside Yankeeland, California, and DC think about that snub? These condescending attacks on Palin, small-town america, “small” states, and normalism are just amazing to behold.

And what’s that say about, say, housewives and career women? I guess they’ve never “thought about” these weighty matters either? I guess they’re too busy breastfeeding or running in beauty pageants or merely being mayors of “small” towns.

Hell, Alaska is even more backward and lacking of culture and interesting people than Auburn, Alabama. And forget about liberals for a sec–how could the Kochtopus support this ticket? Jesus. Listen to these cackling hypocrites. Is dissing Alaska as some hick backwater supposed to help them with voters?

Seitzman continues: “There is not a fireball’s chance in Alaska that Sarah Palin could make that argument in a debate with Joe Biden. She lacks the gravitas, she lacks the knowledge, she lacks the experience. If she were a news anchor we’d say she reeks of local.”

Read that again: She REEKS OF LOCAL? Oh my God, if only I were a Republican so I could enjoy this self-immolation. These clueless condescending nabobs are going to just bury themselves, the condescending, these “cosmopolitan”, “urbane,” “hip” morons!

As a friend noted, “I must admit I found the statement about “mayor of a town of 9,000″ particularly stupid. If somebody could pull out a map for me and show me where, precisely, they intend to pick up electoral votes with such a statement, I would be thrilled. In fact, if ever a party were determined from the outset to find a way to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college, it would look an awful lot like what the D’s are up to these days. Of course, maybe they are trying to lose both - here I had thought that the popular vote was a foregone conclusion, but Obama, et al. are trying to lose even that.”

Finally, see this collection of demonrat comments on Palin. It’s just incredible. As a friend of mine might say, LOL Democrats!

Update: S.M. Oliva notes in a post on the Mises blog: “… it seems to me that “experience” is more about the possession of certain credentials then time spent furthering the evils of the state. Mr. Obama may not have any particular legislative achievements or “executive” experience, but he does possess an undergraduate degree from Columbia and a law degree from Harvard. Mrs. Palin, in contrast, has only an undergraduate degree from the University of Idaho - her fourth stop in an extended college career - financed partially through her winnings as a beauty pageant contestant. She is, as one Democrat told me yesterday, one step removed from white trash.”

Some people want to know how the Democrats could loose this election? This is how. Sarah Palin deserves to be criticized. She appeared to be a relatively decent, more traditional, small government Republican. Her husband and oldest son aren’t registered to a party and she talked highly of Ron Paul. Her selling of her soul to the neocons however has completely tainted her. Or at least it should. But this limousine liberal, high and mighty, attitude will likely not fly with the average voter. Obama already has this aura of elitism. This ’she’s a local’, ‘one step removed from white trash’ will just push blue dog democrats and centralists to McCain, IMO.

http://blogs.smh.com.au/…

Roy W Spencer made the announcement when he gave testimony before the US Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on 22 July 2008. He has a PhD in Meteorology from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and has been
involved in global warming research for close to twenty years. He has numerous peer-reviewed scientific articles dealing with the measurement and interpretation of climate variability and climate change. He is Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, and the U.S. Science Team Leader for the AMSR-E instrument flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite. Data obtained from Aqua is the basis for much of the following.

Here are excerpts from his full testimony.

“Regarding the currently popular theory that mankind is responsible for global warming, I am very pleased to deliver good news from the front lines of climate change research. Our latest research results, which I am about to describe, could have an enormous impact on policy decisions regarding greenhouse gas emissions. … we now have new satellite evidence which strongly suggests that the climate system is much less sensitive than is claimed by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).”

“Another way of saying this is that the real climate system appears to be dominated by “negative feedbacks” — instead of the “positive feedbacks” which are displayed by all twenty computerized climate models utilized by the IPCC. …If true, an insensitive climate system would mean that we have little to worry about in the way of manmade global warming and associated climate change. And, … it would also mean that the warming we have experienced in the last 100 years is mostly
natural. Of course, if climate change is mostly natural then it is largely out of our control, and is likely to end — if it has not ended already, since satellite-measured global temperatures have not warmed for at least seven years now.”

“The support for my claim of low climate sensitivity (net negative feedback) for our climate system is two-fold. First, we have a new research article in-press in the Journal of Climate which uses a simple climate model to show that previous estimates of the sensitivity of the climate system from satellite data were biased toward the high side by the neglect of natural cloud variability. It turns out that the failure to account for natural, chaotic cloud variability generated internal to the climate system will always lead to the illusion of a climate system which appears more sensitive than it really is. …”

“The second line of evidence in support of an insensitive climate system comes from the satellite data themselves. While our work in-press established the existence of an observational bias in estimates of climate sensitivity, it did not address just how large that bias might be. But in the last several weeks, we have stumbled upon clear and convincing observational evidence of particularly strong negative feedback (low climate sensitivity) from our latest and best satellite instruments. That evidence includes our development of two new methods for extracting the feedback signal from either observational or climate model data, a goal which has been called the “holy grail” of climate research. …”

Not including clouds in the simulations invalidates the result? No shit? Funny… skeptics have been saying that for years. I spent my lunch yesterday explaining that and other reasons to question the “consensus” on global cooling global warming global climate change.

The last episode of Penn and Teller’s Bullshit (S06E06) was on the this topic. I recommend watching it though I warn you that what you witness may cause your brain to hurt.

Good news on the AP wire from DC (emphasis added):

WASHINGTON, May 19 (Reuters) - Leaders of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee said on Monday they had reached a deal on legislation to create a multibillion dollar mortgage rescue fund and a new regulator for housing finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The plan would enable the Federal Housing Administration to guarantee billions of dollars in refinanced mortgages for homeowners whose properties have fallen in value since they took out their loan.

“The bill addresses the root of our current economic problems — the foreclosure crisis — by creating a voluntary initiative at no estimated cost to taxpayers which will help Americans keep their homes,” Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd, the committee’s chairman, said in a statement…

“This is a victory for the taxpayers. As far as the housing component is concerned, we’re not funding this… with taxpayers’ money,” Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby, the panel’s top Republican, said on CNBC.

A quick google news search brings up another source with even more info on the planned bill.

Read More…

Pig Book 2008

http://www.cagw.org/…

Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today released the 2008 Congressional Pig Book, the latest installment in an 18-year exposé of pork-barrel spending.

“When Congress adopted earmark reforms last year, there was hope that the number and cost of earmarks would be cut in half.  By any measure, that has not occurred,” said CAGW President Tom Schatz.

In fiscal year 2008, Congress stuffed 11,610 projects (the second highest total ever) worth $17.2 billion into the 12 appropriations bills.  That is a 337 percent increase over the 2,658 projects in fiscal year 2007, and a 30 percent increase over the $13.2 billion total in fiscal year 2007.  Alaska led the nation with $556 in pork per capita ($380 million total), followed by Hawaii with $221 ($283 million) and North Dakota with $208 ($133 million).  CAGW has identified $271 billion in total pork since 1991.

For the first time, the names of members of Congress were added to the projects.  The top three porkers were members of the Senate Appropriations Committee, beginning with Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) with $892 million; Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) with $469 million; and Senator Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) with $465 million.

The Pig Book Summary profiles the most egregious examples, breaks down pork per capita by state, and presents the annual Oinker Awards.  All 11,610 projects are listed in a searchable database on CAGW’s website www.cagw.org.   Examples of pork in the 2008 Pig Book include:

 $3 million for The First Tee;
$1,950,000 for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service;
$460,752 for hops research;
$211,509 for olive fruit fly research in Paris, France;
$196,000 for the renovation and transformation of the historic Post Office in Las Vegas;
$188,000 for the Lobster Institute in Maine; and
$148,950 for the Montana Sheep Institute.

“Americans do not send their hard-earned tax dollars to Washington so that Sen. Daniel Inouye can bring home $173 million in defense pork and receive the Pacific Fleeced Award or get sapped by $4.8 million going to wood utilization research, on which the government has spent $91 million since 1985,” concluded Schatz.

Only the 2nd highest pork year? Come on Congress… next year go for gold. Not like you have to tax us directly for much of it.