Majorityrights Central > Category: U.S. Politics

by Donald Miller

The collapse of the Obama spending machine has a long way to go yet, especially with regard to pilfering the earnings and savings of European Americans. There are many ways Obama & Bernanke can confiscate your income and wealth to establish a multiracial nation.

GREAT GOLD CONFISCATION

To understand some of this, it may be necessary for you to review the history of the great gold confiscation of 1933:

The Gold Confiscation Of April 5, 1933
From: President of the United States Franklin Delano Roosevelt
To: The United States Congress
Dated: 5 April, 1933
Presidential Executive Order 6102

Forbidding the Hoarding of Gold Coin, Gold Bullion and Gold Certificates By virtue of the authority vested in me by Section 5(b) of the Act of October 6, 1917, as amended by Section 2 of the Act of March 9, 1933, entitled

An Act to provide relief in the existing national emergency in banking, and for other purposes~’,

in which amendatory Act Congress declared that a serious emergency exists,

I, Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States of America, do declare that said national emergency still continues to exist and pursuant to said section to do hereby prohibit the hoarding gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates within the continental United States by individuals, partnerships, associations and corporations and hereby prescribe the following regulations for carrying out the purposes of the order:

Section 1. For the purpose of this regulation, the term ‘hoarding” means the withdrawal and withholding of gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates from the recognized and customary channels of trade. The term “person” means any individual, partnership, association or corporation.

Section 2. All persons are hereby required to deliver on or before May 1, 1933, to a Federal Reserve bank or a branch or agency thereof or to any member bank of the Federal Reserve System all gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates now owned by them or coming into their ownership on or before April 28, 1933, except the following ...

RAPID INFLATION NOT SUITABLE

There are fundamentally only three ways to repay the Obama-Bernanke indebtedness—I disregard massive inflation because it would take too long to be effective and, if it happened too quickly, we’d begin to understand the Weimar Republic (1919-1933) really well and up close:

The Weimar Republic had some of the most serious economic problems ever experienced by any Western democracy in history. Rampant hyperinflation, massive unemployment and a large drop in living standards were primary factors. In 1923–1929 there was a short period of economic recovery, but the Great Depression of the 1930s led to a worldwide recession. Germany was particularly affected because it depended heavily on American loans. In 1926, about 2 million Germans were unemployed - this rose to around 6 million in 1932. Many blamed the Weimar Republic. This was made apparent when political parties on both right and left wanting to disband the Republic altogether made any democratic majority in Parliament impossible.

READ MORE...

Although this isn’t addressing the primary cause of the loss of legitimacy—immigration enforced on the states with integration enforced on citizens—this is a very positive development.  The primary danger here is that some “higher power”, such as a North American Union if not the United Nations, will attempt to disintermediate the relationship between the States and the Federal Government—using this crisis as an opportunity to increase the de facto centralization while, in effect, nullifying the US Constitution. 

In any case, the time is coming for action.

Thanks to Bo for this video of Robert Reich and Charles Rangel at an Economic Recovery Plan meeting on 7th January.

Today the $825 billion economic stimulus package was marked up by the House Ways & Means Committee.  It includes money for infrastructure, health care and education projects.  But little to none of it will be coming your way if you are white or middle-class.

Bo Sears sent me the link to an Antiwar.com post with a Fox News interview of Tony Blankley, an Englishman turned American turned lawyer turned journalist turned Jewish extended phenotype who denies he is a neocon.  But Blankley has a new book out titled American Grit in which he pans Obama’s ideas about national service and calls for “a full-on military draft”.

Now, it happens that Bo and the RD guys have already predicted the return of the draft:-

My colleagues and I have considered all kinds of situations in which a new president might need local community leaders to follow him blindly in some new foreign adventure.  The only one we can see that would be nation-shaking … the only one that would fit in the model of a black president and a dangerous military entanglement abroad, and which would give rise to the circumstance where lots of local support had to be brought behind him, would be the re-introduction of the draft.

So Blankley’s timely arrival with the self-same idea is not entirely unexpected.  The intriguing question is: Does a connected guy like Blankley think it up all by himself, or does he get fed it by a Nameless Other or two?

Fr. John sent me this WorldNetDaily link to an article on the Obama birth certificate embroglio.  WoldNetDaily is one of the small handful of slightly off-colour organisations that is campaigning to up-end Obama’s inauguration.

Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
Supreme Court sets ‘natural born’ conference to follow inauguration

A legal challenge that alleges Barack Obama isn’t a “natural born” citizen and therefore constitutionally ineligible to be president of the United States will follow the Democrat into the Oval Office, with a U.S. Supreme Court conference on the dispute set after the Jan. 20 inauguration.

The court’s website today announced that a fourth case on the issue will be reviewed by justices Jan. 23.

The court previously heard two cases in conference – private meetings at which justices consider which cases to accept – and denied both Cort Wrotnowski and Leo Donofrio full hearings.

The court now has a conference scheduled Friday on a case raised by attorney Philip Berg, with another conference on a matter related to the same Berg case on Jan. 16. Then today the court website revealed the case Gail Lightfoot et al v. Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State, will be heard in conference Jan. 23.

The case initially appeared at the Supreme Court Dec. 12 but was rejected. It then was submitted to Chief Justice John Roberts, and today’s notice confirmed it was distributed for the Jan. 23 conference.

Orly Taitz, the California attorney handling the case, said, “The timing of this decision by the chief justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, is absolutely remarkable. On January 7, one day before the January 8 vote by Congress and Senate whether to approve or object to the electoral vote of Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, as president of the United States, Chief Justice Roberts is sending a message to them: ‘Hold on, not so fast, there is value in this case, read it.’”

I really can’t see this or any similar effort disaccomodating the executive too much.  The latter will more than tough it out, quashing each legal challenge with utter disdain - a response licenced by the curious and studied indifference of the GOP as to whether the man elected to serve as America’s 44th president is eligible by birth for office.  At any other time we would see the defeated candidate’s party crawling all over something like this.  Heck, look how they pursued slick Willy for his paltry little indiscretion with “that woman”.  By comparison, Obama may be engaged in a staggeringly cynical electoral charade.  And it gets worse once he is sworn in:-

On Friday the justices will consider Philip J. Berg’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

“This is a historic occasion that will impact the office of the president of the United States as never before. No one has ever brought an action against a president-elect candidate challenging his eligibility to serve based on the ‘natural born’ citizen requirement provided in the United States Constitution, Article II Section 1,” said a statement on Berg’s ObamaCrimes.com website.

Berg suggested if Obama “is allowed to be sworn in as president of the United States, there will be substantial and irrevocable harm to the stability of the United States of America and to its citizens.”

“Because Barack Obama is not a ‘natural born’ citizen as required by the United States Constitution, then all of his actions as president would be null and void,” Berg said.

Wrotnowski and Donofrio would very likely have triggered the “avoid” mechanism that serious politicians reserve for conspiracy theorists.  Lightfoot, a CA libertarian, seems more substantial, but still unlikely in the extreme to break the presidential mould.  But the Berg petition is said to be not at all frivolous, and is the one that requires the president elect’s elusive long form birth certificate to be produced.

So why are the Republicans to a man looking the other way?  Not wanting to appear ungracious losers?  Not wanting to show disloyalty to the Washington insiders and the wider political class?  Not wanting to associate with a bunch of oddball fringe activists?  Not wanting to gamble on bringing the house down on the Obama victory, only to find that the long form certificate does, in fact, contain the word “Hawaii”?  Not wanting to re-fight the presidential election?

1. That the off-script longeurs and foot-in-mouth bloomers we expect from president Obama waste no time in coming, and quickly sour his honeymoon with the white American voter.

2. That “change” is quickly revealed to mean blacks being “served” by white volunteerism in various forms, with whites supposedly gaining from “seeing through their own prejudice”.  And no, it doesn’t fly.  Not for an instant.

3. That white America will begin to suspect that mainstream political America as a whole has no use for it whatsoever beyond its votes and taxes, and its “contribution” to the ethnic spoils system.

4. That the economic rigours of the year ahead cause many more white Americans to question the value of the neoliberal system, of the banking system, of fiat money.

5. That Hollywood can’t make a buck out of its anti-white “entertainment”.

6. That the falling value of university endowments cuts into the best efforts of university faculty to damage and discriminate against White students.

7. That when white Americans think of Israel they remember the Gaza Strip, not “America’s best little buddy”.

8. That when White Nationalists speak of racial politics they remember they are being heard by intelligent and discerning fellow whites.

9. That more White Nationalists will reject the anti-political notion that all they need is less Jewish power and more white racial consciousness.

10. That White Nationalists will discover that freedom and justice, as much as love, are theirs, and theirs alone, to espouse.

Happy New Year to you all.

Just time for one last blast before the US election - this one from Martin Hutchinson at Prudent Bear.
GW

The number of economically damaging policy ideas imposed on the United States has greatly increased in the last few months. However from the statements of the Presidential candidates, the next few years may turn this storm of bad ideas into a blizzard. Those with an emotional attachment to the US economy should brace themselves for trauma.

The new salience of bad economic ideas is not particularly surprising. The US economy is heading into an economic downturn that promises to be at least as severe as those of 1974 and 1980-82, whose memory is already fading a generation into the past. Additionally, the 2000-07 period was one in which US voters made very small if any income gains, with such gains arising only through refinancing of ever more gigantic home mortgages. Meanwhile the distant and dislikeable titans of Wall Street apparently scooped up all the money generated by the economy.

Now the housing bubble has burst, the average jaundiced voter naturally sees the free market system and the George W. Bush administration as responsible for the recent not-particularly-pleasant years and the economic horror that has followed. Claims by Republican politicians that the debacle was all the fault of the housing finance agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, while partly true are wholly unconvincing.

With voters miserable and facing a disastrous economic position that they believe was caused by free market excesses, it is not surprising that they are looking favorably on statist nostrums. Both political candidates have propounded bad ideas; Obama more than McCain largely because he has more ideas in general. In addition, there are a few bad ideas that have embedded themselves into the system, accepted by both political candidates and the political class as a whole.

READ MORE...

By Bo Sears

A mystery has revealed itself before our eyes.  It lies in the concluding portion of US Senator Joe Biden’s speech at a Seattle fund-raiser.  His unsettling prediction is that a test of the next president will be “manufactured“ early in his incumbency.  But, most oddly, it will require ordinary Democrat voters and Obama supporters to show solidarity with their man and use their “influence within the community”.

What kind of test can Biden mean?

Here is the text taken from Alexander Cockburn’s piece on CounterPunch posted this weekend.

“Mark my words,” Biden said solemnly at a Seattle fundraiser last Sunday. “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

“I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate,” Biden went on. He mentioned the Middle East and Russia. “And he’s gonna need help. And the kind of help he’s gonna need is, he’s gonna need you - not financially to help him - we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right.”

What exactly is Biden hinting at in that last sentence? From the context of that whole paragraph it’s clear enough to me he’s suggesting that despite hopes nourished by the sort of people at that Seattle fundraiser that post-Bush/Cheney America might backpeddle from hasty military confrontations, President Obama will stand tall and lose no time in going eyeball to eyeball with those who would test his resolve.

So let’s try to answer Cockburn’s question.  These are the key elements Biden provides.

1. “President Obama” is going to be tested early, as Kennedy was tested in Cuba in 1962.  Possibly by Russia.  Possibly in the Middle-East.

2. He will respond militarily, not diplomatically.  This response will appear flat-wrong to many Americans.  National unity itself will be at risk.  The same kind of belief and support that elected Obama to office will be required to keep him there.

My colleagues and I have considered all kinds of situations in which a new president might need local community leaders to follow him blindly in some new foreign adventure.  The only one we can see that would be nation-shaking … the only one that would fit in the model of a black president and a dangerous military entanglement abroad, and which would give rise to the circumstance where lots of local support had to be brought behind him, would be the re-introduction of the draft.

Young white Americans may not be willing to risk their lives for a black Commander-in-Chief.  For sure, it is hard to believe that present-day American college students are any more eager to be cut up, shot, and killed in 2009 than they were in Johnson’s Vietnam. 

The image this calls to mind is the draft-dodging of the Vietnam era.  But Canada has already signalled its willingness to reject young diverse white Americans fleeing from a draft (along with other young Americans).  So the easy escape is blocked:-

… there’s a catch for those who flee to Canada. In the era of the Vietnam war, American draft dodgers and deserters could easily take up residence in Canada, and stay as long as they liked.  Now, however, Canadian law has changed.

“Well, legally what’s changed is that there’s a general policy in Canada now that to apply here you must apply from outside the country. And that’s not really an option that American troops could do,” said Jeffrey House, a Vietnam veteran who fled to Canada. “Because they’re gonna be sent to Iraq next week or next month.”

I don’t expect we’ll see the rebellious young with flowers in their hair this time.  And their natural recourse won’t be the ideals of the radical left and won’t be black civil rights, because these are the values of the political Establishment today.

But have you got any other ideas of substantive policy initiatives that couldn’t be implemented with only the powers in the presidency and the Congress … initiatives that would require wide-ranging local public support?

Bo Sears is a director of ResistingDefamation