Americans are celebrating the nation's 233rd birthday, and the words of the Declaration of Independence will be mouthed at countless patriotic ceremonies across the land. The core ideals articulated by those words are still embraced by solid majorities of the American public.

 A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 89% of American adults agree that "we are all endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Only seven percent (7%) disagree on that founding premise.

Seventy-four percent (74%) agree with the assertion that "all men are created equal" while just 23% disagree.

Fifty-six percent (56%) agree with the view that governments derive their only just authority from the "consent of the governed." Interestingly, one-in-four Americans (25%) disagree.

Other survey data shows that voters nationwide overwhelming trust the American people to make key decisions more than they trust political leaders. Those who disagree and hold a Political Class perspective represent a small minority of the population.

When presented with a choice of five Founding Fathers, 40% of American adults were able to correctly identify John Hancock as the first man to sign the Declaration of Independence in 1776. Sixteen percent (16%) thought that honor belonged to Thomas Jefferson, the primary author of the document.

Ten percent (10%) thought George Washington signed first, but he was not even present for that event. Washington led the rag-tag colonial army against what was then the world's mightiest power. Finally, in 1781, the British surrendered, and the Declaration of Independence became true independence. It took another six years before the Constitution of the United States became the framework for our government. At that convention, Washington was the chairman, and the Constitution was drafted with him in mind as our first president.

• Electricity levels have jumped from 3,958 megawatts to 6,020 megawatts across the nation;
• Telephone lines have increased from 833,000 to 1,300,000.
• Cell phones have jumped from 80,000 to an estimated 17.7 million.
• People safe drinking water has almost doubled, jumping from 12.9 million to 21.2 million.
• Sewage access has nearly doubled as well, rising from 6.2 million people served to 11.3 million people served.
• Oil production is also nearing prewar levels with daily production at 2.44 million barrels per day compared with 2.58 million barrels per day before the war.

America has spend $683 billion; suffered 4,318 killed in action; 31,408 wounded in action; 37, 512 wounded by non-hostile means. 1,360 civilian contractors have been killed.

About 2.8 million Iraqis are displaced; 2 million live abroad mostly in Syria and Jordan up from 500,000 before the war.

Iraqi war deaths were somewhere between 110 and 180,000 a majority due to enemy activity. (An infamous,  now widely discredited "study" by Glibert Burnham and an ambarrassed Johns Hopkins University cites over a million "excess" deaths in Iraq. A figure widely if improperly cited.)

It is known that 423 academics and 139 journalist have been assasinated by terrorists..

Sources: The Associated Press, State Department, Defense Department, Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, The Brookings Institution, Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, International Organization for Migration, Committee to Protect Journalists, National Priorities Project, The Brussels Tribunal, and the U.S. Department of Labor.

Today, I propose a slight change to this slogan to reflect our current situation. My revised slogan is No taxation without cogitation. Aren't familiar with cogitation? It's a great old fashioned word that means concerted thought or reflection. So what I want my representatives to do is simply read all proposed bills, think about it and then vote. Sounds reasonable, right? And yet, from the first Congress there have been a few Senators and Representatives who would never bother to read a bill but would vote the party line. However starting this year, major bills are being passed in which none of our Congressmen or women are bothering to read what they are voting on much less cogitating on how much it would cost us, the citizens, when the bill is implemented.

This new trend started with the Stimulus Bill which grew into a 1000+ bill which no one could have read in its entirety in the brief time between publishing the bill and voting on it. This massive bill, which would spend over $787 billion of our money, was passed by 246 people (ok mainly democrats) in the House and by 60 Senators. To their credit, our government officials were told that they had to vote on this bill immediately in order to resuscitate a dying economy. And yes, in January 2009 the news was grim with increasing unemployment and major companies failing left and right. We also had a new and exciting administration and so it is understandable if a vote on this bill was seen as yet one more support of Obama.

For all of these reasons, this massive bill, which few people read, was pushed through Congress on record time in order to save our economy. Now it is six months later yet less than a tenth of the money has been spent. OK, I'm all for saving the money if the economy is rebounding. Oh wait. The economy is worse than the start of the year. In fact, Obama's economic team had said that if the bill was passed then the 7.2% unemployment rate at the time of the vote would probably peak at 8%. Oops. They just announced that our current unemployment rate is 9.1%. And that is with the $787 billion in stimulus aid! Seems to me that maybe somebody ought to finally read all 1000+ pages to see just what that money is earmarked for and how it is supposed to be stimulating our economy. All it has stimulated so far is the unemployment rate.

But did Congress learn? No. In fact last week the House of Representatives did it again. They passed another long bill regarding a new concept of Cap and Trade. From what I understand it is basically a taxing platform to raise money from corporations and citizens to spend on "green" environmental stuff. Even putting aside the ongoing arguments (and yes Senator Gore, people are still debating global warming as they should) there is still the unconscionable fact that our Congressmen and women once again voted on a bill which they didn't read.

This time it was a complete farce. When Representatives complained that they didn't even have a copy of the bill Speaker Nancy Pelosi told them that there was one copy at the podium. That's it; one copy for over 400 people to share and read. Only problem is that even that "final" copy was missing the 300 pages of addendums added at 3am of the day of the vote. Denying Representatives a chance to even read a bill is a complete abuse of her power. Plus it is one thing to be loyal to a new administration but to blindly pass massive bills unread which would change the foundation of this country and heavily tax citizens in an effort to redistribute wealth is unethical and disgusting.

Has it reached the point where we need to demand that if a bill requires new or increased taxes then our Senators and Representatives who vote on it must sign a statement indicating that they read it in full. They would then be held accountable for what was in that bill and what they approved with their vote. If they were forced to read it and to be accountable then they just might produce reasonable bills without pages and pages of rediculous earmarks.

Plus isn't accountability what Obama promised us? Wasn't his administration supposed to be one of both accountability and transparency? And yet Congressmen can't even get their own copy of a bill and when they do the bills are so voluminous that no one can read it in time for the vote. Plus there is the whole issue of the unheard of speed in which these bills are being forced through committees and onto the floor with little to no discussions and not even time to read it even if you had your own copy and wanted to read it.

It is time to say Stop! We must demand No taxation without cogitation! We and our children and grandchildren will be paying for the taxes hidden in these unread bills and we can't let this go on. Beginning with the upcoming Senate vote on the Cap and Trade we must demand that our Senators at least read the bill before they vote on it.

And how sad that we even have to tell our Senators and Representatives to read something before voting on it. But thanks to Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid who are trying to jam bills with massive taxing and redistribution of our country's wealth down our throats then we must demand of our Congressmen and women to read the bill and think about its implications before voting on it.

So join me in shouting No taxation without cogitation and maybe someday there might actually be a vote by people who have read the bill, understand its tax implication and had a lively intelligent discussion about it. Now wouldn't that be nice….

It is certainly true that everyone from the Keynesians, Monetarists and the Austrian Schools of economics all seem to promote the wonders of  Free Markets. These ancient and revered tenets are also widely amplified in the media by the likes of Paul Krugman, Milton Friedman, Larry Summers, Ben Bernanke et al. But, strangely, and from the economic opposition, this very same esteemed principle is urgently and heavily shouted by the likes of Peter Schiff, Jim Rogers, Marc Faber, Joseph Stiglitz, Doug Casey and Congressman Ron Paul. So, I guess something smells fishy in Kansas, something is a bit awry, evidently these free market principles are perhaps being played with and twisted or bluffed for some particular advantage. And when economic principles become thus bastardized, abused and two faced, the common-sense simplicity of economic Free Market principles.becomes lost and wayward  to  simple understanding, wherein government planners and schemers are able to shamelessly steer the markets, and  all trusting citizens are misled and fooled. So, perhaps a proper definition is in order for those of us who are utterly flummoxed. Here are several simple definitions of Free Market:

Definition 1

Business governed by the laws of supply and demand, not restrained by government interference, regulation or subsidy.

Definition 2

A foreign exchange market that is not controlled by the government.

Definition 3

A security with sufficient liquidity that its price is not significantly affected by availability.

When you read these definitions, is it any wonder that ordinary people are so confused with the complex economic activities of the US government? And although the likes of Geithner, Summers and that know-all President Obama resolutely preach Free Market principles out of the left-hand side of their faces — all you have to do is dig down a little into the current stinking US economic septic pit to expose all the dirty, gross market manipulations that have been perpetuated by these paragons of free markets.  If you want to read about this then this link is a good starter. But don't mistake what I'm saying here, the governments of most other developed countries in Europe and elsewhere also manipulate the Free Markets to some much smaller extent. After all, they've had a good teacher haven't they? But, in my opinion, the US government throughout the last century has been The King Daddy of Market Manipulators.

Perhaps, as an American, you might feel that this economic interference and malpractice is OK, –  Hey, what's all the fuss about ? — that's simply the way the economic game is now played, since it 's  all part of the capitalist principle to win economic advantage by any clever and innovative means possible. Perhaps the US government is only trying to help America to lead economically from the front, so all can be forgiven with these manipulations. And maybe this is all true. But there is also a great danger here. America's economic lead is undoubtedly waning and the likes of Russia, China and the other emerging market countries are all playing catch-up with a vengeance now. Soon the global economic baton and lead  may well pass to the likes of China and what then? China has been watching America's economic activities and is now very aware of the American Governments blatant hands-on manipulation of the dollar. So, when China eventually moves to the front of the Global economic pack — as she must through sheer un-leveraged manufacturing productivity and savings — how will America cope? China has been a patient, fast learner. On his last visit to China, Geithner was laughed at, hooted and booed when, during a speech,  he assured the Chinese government that US Treasuries were a safe bet. Well he tried the bluff, but crashed and burned mightily. Fairly clear that the Chinese now fully realize what America is up to, that China must pay heavily  and sacrifice all her savings for America's re-emergence without any other choice. The point here is that political sway and influence relies heavily on the economic performance and riches of any country — this is certainly one form of power — and so if America has been playing The King Daddy of Market Manipulators then what's to stop China or Russia or India or The Middle East — as they eventually overtake America's falling, failing economy — playing by the same dirty manipulative market rules? Will Americans then cry "Foul !!" when China or Russia start to manipulate the markets heavily in their own favor. And maybe Russia and China will then laughingly respond with "Hypocrite!! Hypocrite !!". Who could blame them? The current "rules" of modern economics seem more likely derived from Sun Tzu than they are from the essays and works of Maynard Keynes, Milton Friedman or Ludwig von Mises. Anything goes, it seems.

In the first definition of free markets — defined as markets which are not interfered with, manipulated or subsidized by governments — it is quite evident that the US government(as well as governments in Europe and other developed countries) clearly have not abided by this rule. This simple rule defines that the markets are an economic jungle, and when left alone as they should be,  if any business or stock doesn't perform, then that business is inefficient, uncompetitive, non-productive, over-leveraged  or corrupt and rightly deserves to die. So, according to the Darwinian free market principles, only the strongest and best performing businesses should survive. But what have we got instead? In a word — Bailout after bailout. The US Government is not only rescuing Wall Street and huge corporations, the Fed is also buying up all their dirty toxic assets as well !! In effect, the US government now clearly supports all the corrupt, fraudulent, insolvent and too-big-to-fall business institutions of America which is quite the opposite of Free Market principles.

As further evidence of  US Government market manipulations — all you have to do is take a peek at the recent performance of commodities like oil, gold, soyabeans and wheat. I won't spend time on more evidence, there's too much evidence really. But I will describe how it is done.

From my readings the US FED is supposedly responsible for the maintenance and regulation of US banks, price stability, inflation and the US money supply. Little known is how the FED maintains the strength of the US Dollar. The FED maintains the US dollar, not only by suppressing interest rates,  but  by entering into large currency swap arrangements via the Federal Open Market Committee. This Committee is allowed to interfere and play the currency exchange markets as much as they like to maintain the strength of the dollar. And, according to the second definition of Free Markets — A foreign exchange market that is not controlled by the government — again, this FOMC activity directly offends and contradicts the definition of  "Free Markets" doesn't it ?  

There is also a very little known arm of the US Treasury called the Exchange Stabilization Fund(ESF), which discreetly though massively manipulates the US stock markets by their very secretive and hard-working Plunge Protection Team(PPT). Recent activities of the ESF seem to be concerned with dollar price stabilization via direct gold manipulation in the commodities market. From the Market Skeptics site:

Originally funded out of the profits from the 1934 gold confiscation, the little known ESF is available for intervention in the foreign exchange markets. In the absence of a Congressional appropriation, the Clinton administration used funds from the ESF to finance the 1995 U.S. bailout of Mexico. However, accepting the Greenspan dictum that it "would be wholly inappropriate" for the Fed ever to intervene in the gold market to manipulate the price, it is hard to imagine any situation in which such intervention would be appropriate by the ESF, never mind one involving large profits for the former investment bank of the Secretary himself.

Last week, in response to an inquiry from Bridge News, Secretary Summers "categorically denied" that the Treasury was selling gold. With all due respect to the Secretary, this is not the allegation that knowledgeable gold market participants and observers are making. Their allegation is that the ESF — by writing gold call options or otherwise — is making sufficient gold cover available to certain bullion banks to allow them safely to take large short positions in gold, thereby putting downward pressure on the price and in the process making huge profits for themselves.

So, how does the ESF manipulate the free markets, what is its modus operandi ?
From an interview in the Americans for a Free Republic website:

The PPT [Plunge Protection Team] operation has access to unlimited funds because it was formed by the Treasury which can create money out of thin air. My guess is that the organization is structured through an offshore hedge fund established by the ESF as a front group. They do their buying and selling from perhaps the Bahamas or the Cayman Islands. One thing we know is that they place their orders through several of the big brokerages in New York such as Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, or Merrill Lynch. This way no one at the brokerage houses or on the exchange floors actually sees any massive buy orders from Washington bureaucracies.

The way they work the scheme is whenever the market is going too low and threatening to crash, the PPT initiates buy programs on margin for S&P futures contracts in large enough volume to check the market fall and panic short sellers into covering their short positions. This creates a "short squeeze" and explodes prices upward. Hedge funds and institutional buyers then rush into the market to buy in order to catch the rally. This extends the rally and effectively ends the potential market crash as investor mood shifts from bearish to bullish. The rally is created in the way that lighting a match to kindling ignites a roaring fire. The S&P futures contracts are so highly leveraged that a $200 million buy can be initiated for $10 million in the PPT account with JP Morgan. A $500 million buy can be initiated for $25 million. These margins are chump change for the Treasury-ESF-PPT operatives. As the rally proceeds, the PPT then sells their contracts back to the hedge funds and institutional buyers that follow after them. The PPT then goes to the sidelines to await the next crisis when they will need to stem a potential crash.

Is this not also outright market interference and manipulation? This makes me laugh very sarcastically concerning one of President Obama's past stated policy dictums. Early on in his reign,  when Obama first came  to power — he made much rhetorical sound and thunder concerning  sterner rules, regs and transparency regarding offshore bank accounts and businesses in places such as the Cayman Islands. Can anyone now see  that this was all BS — because without these non-transparent offshore accounts and businesses the ESF simply could not function or do its covert job. So, folks, anyone with an offshore account will be safe enough in the future. This empty and hollow promise by Obama seems to be just one more ineffective and deliberate distraction for his people.

So, please, let's not have anymore babble about how we have Free Markets.  We haven't had Free Markets in over a century and they will never return. But I will give you a new economic rule:

The Free Market principles are dead. But whichever country is at the top of the global economic pyramid will always endeavour to control and manipulate the global markets without fail — in any  dark, selfish and illicit manner they choose. Sadly, this rule seems already to be the accepted economic norm. And, like it or not, global leadership always changes according to economic circumstance because the Global Markets will forever remain a black, complex and unpredictable jungle and  one that is still very capable of teaching harsh lessons against the greater follies of both stupidity and greed versus risk.

And so it goes on, through all this continual massive government market interference, with all the usual   stupidity, folly or greed,  such that with this greater risk  and leverage comes  a much deeper decent into the economic abyss. In truth, The Markets can certainly be manipulated but their final timing and outcome can never be accurately predicted. This is how lessons are learned,  from the simple failed investor to the massive slide into Hell of a complete economy.

Such is the timeless  nature and behaviour of The Markets which, even though economically bound and manipulated like a great tiger,  are still able to behave remarkably freely and so unpredictably. Somehow, even with all this manipulation, the US government still manages to screw up the markets regularly. After all, that most illusive of all predictables — Market Confidence — is surely derived from nothing more than human action and human behaviour.

And there is no accurate economic or mathematical model for that one. Right ?

-

Other References:

The Exchange Stabilization Fund

The Exchange Stabilization Fund: Slush Money or War Chest ?

About ten years ago mr brother, Mike bought a house in the subdivision our family first moved to in 1973 which coincidentally was on July 3rd. In fact on our second day in our new home we went around the corner and down the street to the lake where there was a 4th of July picnic and fireworks. This was the only year the subdivision ever did this as the community quickly became too large.

Fast forward 25+ years and my brother bought a home in our old neighborhood just two doors down from that lake. Now it's my brother who is throwing a 4th of July party on the 3rd. For the past few years they have rented out the community beach for their big party. And it is big. The last time I looked 81 people were definitely coming including 29 kids! Another 20-30 still hadn't replied but most of those will show up plus if anyone from the subdivision stops by they are absorbed into the party even if they weren't invited.

Mike and Candy throw a true summer beach party. They rent out one of those bouncy places for the younger kids, have lots of other outdoor games and balls plus people bring boats for tubing and water skiing. So the kids of all ages have something to do - even if it is simply giggling and talking to the cute boys which my eldest niece is getting proficient at - much to her parents chagrin.

When the families arrive, the men stand around the grills talking to my brother as he flips the burgers while Candy directs the women who are bringing mouth watering side dishes of pasta or fruit and delicious deserts. The simplicity of the food is another reason I love this holiday. Oh sure you could spend hours making some fancy pasta dish or doing those deviled egg thingies but people are happy with burgers and store bought potato salad and coleslaw. Or at least I am happy with it!

When the kids get hungry they swarm the tables then back to the lake or games again. Once the food is out the adults sit back in beach chairs sipping whatever cold drink they brought in their coolers. And that is pretty much most of the party - sitting, relaxing, enjoying the hot evening, catching up with people you only see at these parties, watching the kids have fun and eating too much. Ain't it wonderful?

But it can't be the 4th, even on the 3rd without fireworks. A nearby town has their big fireworks display on the 3rd. Lucky for us, if we stand on the dock or move our chairs to the edge of the lake we have a nearly perfect view of the professional fireworks. The only bad part is that men have to be men and play with fireworks on their own. Frequently my brother will have bought some stuff or some of the other men will have something so after the official fireworks we have the unofficial fireworks. The men set off their stuff while the women hold their breaths and check to make sure the kids stay far away.

Afterwards, everyone pitches in to clean up then most go home while a core group head back to my brother's house where kids jump in the pool and the adults enjoy the air conditioning, soft couches and cold drinks, and not necessarily in that order. All in all it is a wonderful July 4th on the 3rd!

After saying all this, I can't go this year. After my recent hospitalization and surgeries I am still a bit shaky when I walk. Even with my cane, I know I would be nervous walking on the grass and sand especially with all the kids running around. I did ask my wound care nurse if I could go swimming and was emphatically told no; not in a pool and definitely not in a lake. As I still have an open wound healing on my leg she would prefer if I stayed far away from lakes, dirt, sand and anything that could infect it. So that pretty much rules out going this year.

Instead I will have the kind of 4th that I use to have before my brother's party. Tomorrow I have a therapeutic massage which I hope works or at least feels good. I specifically made it for 11:30 because across the street is a take out Chinese place. After my appointment I will load up on Chinese food for the weekend. Ok my food choice may not seem appropriate but I make up for that with my love of patriotic music. I am a sucker for a Sousa march and this is the last reason I love this holiday. I even programmed my new phone's ring to be the Star Spangled Banner!

So the morning of the 4th I will watch the Williams sisters play at Wimbledon and hopefully in the afternoon a station will have Stars and Stripes, the old movie about Sousa or the classic Yankee Doodle Dandy. In the evening after my lo mein I will watch any and every fireworks display on TV and the more patriotic songs, the better. I am sorry to miss Mike's party but I think I will have a grand ol' time at home. I hope you do, too.

Happy Independence Day!

A senior member of Obama's auto task force testified Wednesday that the U.S. government will not continue to fund General Motors Corp.'s operations if the automaker doesn't get approval to sell its assets to a new company within the next 10 days.

"We have no intention to further fund this company if the sale order is not entered by July 10," Harry Wilson, one of the Treasury Department officials overseeing GM's restructuring, said while being cross-examined by an attorney for a group of GM bondholders who stand to lose big if the Obama task force gets its way. That, of course is why they are opposing the sale.

The No. 1 U.S. automaker's government-backed plan for a quick exit from bankruptcy hinges on the sale plan, which would allow it to leave behind many of the costs and liabilities that have made the company unprofitable in the past.

The Detroit-based automaker, whose June 1 filing for bankruptcy protection was the fourth-largest in U.S. history, is hoping to avoid a lengthy court battle over the sale. Last month, objections from bondholders and other groups dragged out rival Chrysler LLC's hearing on its sale for three days. This is day three of the GM hearing.

After Auburn Hills, Michigan-based Chrysler's sale was approved by the bankruptcy court, the bondholder and consumer groups appealed the decision all the way up to the Supreme Court before it ultimately went through and Chrysler subsequently emerged from Chapter 11 as a new company owned by the Italian government subsidized FIAT Company.

Bondholders are among the hundreds of parties including unions, state officials, consumer groups and individuals have filed objections to GM's plan, threatening to hold up its sale as well.

As part of a deal brokered with the auto task force, the U.S. government will get a 60 percent stake in the new company in exchange for the billions in tax dollars it has pumped into GM over the past several months in order to keep it afloat.

The Canadian government, which has also contributed billions in aid, will get a 12.5 percent stake while the United Auto Workers union will take a 17.5 percent share to fund its health care obligations. Unsecured bondholders receive the remaining 10 percent.

Existing GM shareholders will be wiped out as their investments in GM stock are confiscated are redistributed as described.

The remaining pieces of the company, including some closed plants, will become the "Old GM" and be liquidated.

GM hopes to emerge as a leaner company, less burdened by debt and labor costs as it faces a severe recession that has sapped car and truck sales. Automakers, which are due to report June U.S. sales on Wednesday, have seen sales fall 37 percent over the first five months of the year.

The sale hearing, which drew hundreds of attorneys, picketing retirees and others to a Manhattan courthouse, kicked off on Tuesday with testimony from GM President and CEO Fritz Henderson, who also cautioned that the automaker's plan could fall apart if the sale did not go through by July 10.

Testimony from Henderson and other GM restructuring officials dragged on for several hours as the many attorneys representing various objectors took their turns at the podium.

The parties trying to block the sale include groups and several individuals with product-related liability claims against the company who oppose the sale because people with pending claims against GM will be forced to seek compensation from "Old GM," where there will likely be nothing left to pay their claims.

Meanwhile, a group of three of GM's unsecured bondholders are objecting to the sale, claiming that they're entitled to more in exchange for their investments in the company.

And a trio of labor unions say that their retirees stand to lose health care benefits if the sale goes through as approved. Unlike the UAW, which brokered a deal for a stake in the company, those unions say they won't have anything to pay for retiree health care.

In Honduras, demonstrators have appealed to the media to tell the truth. One sign said in Spanish: "CNN: That the entire world opens its eyes…Honduras wants peace not a dictatorship."

Yet America's media  report on the turnout of a couple hundred pro-Zelaya protesters in Honduras, ignoring the many thousands that have demonstrated in support of ousting the radical leftist tyrant. Demonstrators carried signs saying, "Peace and democracy. Out with Mel and Chavez." Others said, "Democracy yes; communism no."

Ironically the :"new media" which was extolled in Iran is being ignored in Honduras. Bloggers charge Zelaya with adopting the style, advice and funding from left-wing leaders such as Hugo Chávez, Fidel Castro, Evo Morales, Rafael Correa and Daniel Ortega."

An anti-communist alliance called UnoAmerica, the Union of Democratic Organizations of America, has recognized the new government of Honduras and urges support for it, issuing a statement saying that "in Honduras there has not been a blow to the state, but rather a constitutional succession, perfectly legitimate, after the intent of ex-president Manuel Zelaya to violate the constitution and maintain power, following the mandate of Hugo Chavez."

Regarding Obama's ally, Venezuelan ruler Chavez, UnoAmerica said that "He is tied to Colombian narcotics terrorism (FARC) and to the government of [Iranian President] Ahmadinejad. He finances the Cuban dictatorship. He permanently tramples the Constitution and kidnaps the liberties of the people. He commits electoral fraud. He forcibly represses peaceful and disarmed Venezuelans. He closes means of communication. He hates the Catholic Church."

Rebutting charges of a "military coup," UnoAmerica noted that "the Armed Forces of Honduras have been limited to obey the judicial mandate, that which obligates a reestablishment of constitutional order, thus showing its subordination to the civil authority."

Complicating plans by the Obama White House and its U.N. allies for a forced return of the former president, Honduras Foreign Minister Enrique Ortez told CNN en Espanol that Zelaya was implicated in drug trafficking from Venezuela into the U.S.

"Every night, three or four Venezuelan-registered planes land without the permission of appropriate authorities and bring thousands of pounds…and packages of money that are the fruit of drug trafficking," he said. "We have proof of all of this. Neighboring governments have it. The DEA [U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration] has it," he added.

At a U.N. meeting on October 13, 2008, Zelaya had openly called for the legalization of drugs - supposedly to reduce violence - just weeks after the Obama supporter George Soros-funded Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy had met to discuss how to pursue such a course of action. The group subsequently released a report calling for a "paradigm shift" on how to handle the illegal drug problem. Billionaire Soros, a long-time funder of campaigns to legalize dangerous drugs, has purchased the services of several former Latin American government officials to push this cause.

Zelaya's comments were immediately denounced by U.N. Office of Drug Control regional representative José Manuel Martinez Morales, who said such an approach was to "stick our heads under the sand like ostriches and accept the drug trade which is annihilating our youth."

Last November Zelaya appeared with Soros at a U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean conference in the Dominican Republic.

At the Tuesday news conference at the United Nations, where a resolution was adopted in favor of returning Zelaya to power, the ousted Marxist ruler was asked if the United States had been behind the "coup" that forced him out. No, Zelaya said. "The United States has changed a great deal," he explained. He went on to say, "I have listened to President Obama. It is not only that he condemns the events, but he has demanded the restoration of the President," referring to himself.

On this point, Zelaya was correct. The United States has certainly changed under Obama. When Ronald Reagan was president, the United States assisted pro-freedom forces and endeavored to keep the communists out of Central America. Now, the United States intervenes on behalf of the communists and their allies, using the U.N. as cover.

Zelaya held his press conference at the U.N. with the President of the United Nations General Assembly, Miguel D'Escoto, a communist priest who received the Lenin Peace Prize from the old Soviet Union.

D'Escoto is another one of Obama's allies, having worked with his Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice to forge a new international socialist order at the recent United Nations Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis. The scheme involves world government financed by global taxes, another cause that is very popular with George Soros.

This article is based in part on on a published analysisby Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in Media on July 1, 2009 confirmed by other sources and edited and amended.   

Within that context Ellis had described America's landmarks good and bad concluding by speaking about "perhaps the most creative act of the founding era as to make time as well as space an indispensible ally. In effect extending the founding moment everlasting into the future."

If you subscribe to Ellis' notions of creating time and space into an everlasting future contrast and compare that with the report of what Dr. Charles Krauthammer said to a private group at the Center for the American Experiment including:

• 1. Pay no attention to what Obama says, rather watch what he does.
• 2. Obama came to Washington to dismantle capitalism.
• 3. Obama sees himself more a world ruler than just US President - standing above it all - orchestrating and coordinating various countries and their agenda.
• 4. He sees moral equivalency in all cultures.
• 5. His apology tour was a prime example that he sees America as an imperialist nation.

Assuming Ellis' and Krauthammer's theories are each at least partially relevant I believe then I can argue that 2009 will at least begin a reformation if not a revolutionary change.  But, not what most who voted for him thought.Revolution not in the shooting sense but as a time of major spasm similar to that which consumed most of that period between 1775 and 1803. . 

As America turns from a predominantly white country of Judeo-Christian Euro centric ethos to a tan one where Hispanics are much more prominent;  blacks less so in terms of numbers but disproportionately shoved forward by Obama.The reformation or revolution will NOT come easily or willingly. Exactly how that will happen is unclear.but it clearly is occurring.

What is most clear is that Obama has throttled up America to breakneck speed and put it on an umapped and contorted road of blind curves. What is also clear is Obama is disinterested in being a unifierunder any pretext and now has his 60^th Senate vote in the person of admitted arch liberal Al Franken - so he need not be.  Rather he is about change as only he envisions fit.  

Obama's domestic and foreign policy are a mixture of craps, Texas holdem', chess and Russian roulette but with only one chamber empty and pointed at your head. Does America still heed John Adam's admonition for a nation of laws not of men, or a man.

Happy '"INDEPENDENCE" day.

The move aims to counter Western depictions of the country as a fast and loose post-communist frontier. Gambling operators say the state is pushing the industry underground - and losing $1 billion in tax revenues.

 There are big empty spaces on som e of Moscow's trendiest streets early Wednesday, where the glitziest symbols of post-Soviet freedom - gambling casinos - had done a roaring business until they were closed down by a strict new law, literally at the stroke of midnight.

The law, promoted by former president and current Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and in the works since 2006, was aimed at shutting down a controversial business that a majority of Russians consider "immoral" and damaging to the country's image.

About 500 major gaming establishments have been forced to close their doors, including some truly palatial casinos in downtown Moscow that were frequented by many in the country's elite. Also shut down by police are countless hole-in-the-wall joints in grocery stores, train stations, and street kiosks that had featured a few slot machines or one-armed bandits and catered to just about anybody who passed by.

Gambling operators say up to 400,000 people have been tossed out of their jobs and the state has lost up to $1 billion in legal tax revenues, while the lucrative gambling industry will probably thrive anyway - but underground, in the hands of organized crime.

"A casino is a necessary service, like restaurants and theaters," says Vadim Bereslavksy, who managed the Hotel Cosmos casino in Moscow for the past 15 years, and was responsible for around 800 employees. "Many of the people who worked with me will have a hard time now; we'll try to find them jobs in the industry outside of the country."

Fast and loose post-communist frontier?
But many conservatives have chafed for years at Western depictions of Russia as a fast and loose post-communist frontier, run by mafia thugs and anything-goes capitalists.

For many of them, the huge neon-lit casinos that have dominated Moscow's post-Soviet downtown nightscape were a symbol of national decay.

"Practice has shown that this business is socially destructive," says Yevgeny Fyodorov, chair of the State Duma's committee on economic policy. He says it caused large numbers of people, including vulnerable groups like pensioners, to become "addicts" and led to serious damage to families and communities.

"Gambling is neither acceptable for the authorities, nor for society. Here we have absolute support," he says.

A survey released this week by the independent Profi Online Research agency found that 72 percent of Russians support the law, while 19 percent oppose it.

Moscow mayor tackles remaining exceptions 
From now on, gambling in big Russian cities like Moscow and St. Petersburg will be limited to lotteries, bookmakers, and licensed "poker clubs" where card games will be treated as a form of sports.

But Moscow Mayor Yury Luzhkov, a stern opponent of gambling, says he's already moving to crack down on those exceptions.

"We've approached the government for a decision of poker clubs and Internet gambling for cash, which is pretty much the same as the gambling business," Mr. Luzhkov told the official Itar-Tass agency. "Poker clubs? How can you call that sport?"

Officials seem unconcerned about the loss of tax revenues and the sudden spike in unemployment, despite the fact that Russia is gripped in economic crisis.

"We'll lose tax money, but the costs incurred by people who became addicted to gambling were so much higher that we'll actually save," says Alexander Krutov, a Moscow Duma deputy.

"And I'm not in the least concerned about the casino personnel," he adds. "They have good manners, they tend to speak English, and they're mostly young. They'll adapt and do fine."

Four new gambling zones 
Ironically not unlike the then remote emptiness of Las Vegas Vladimir Putin is playing a latter-day Bugsy Siegel by proposing four remote districts where gambling will be permitted, which could be transformed into Las Vegas-style tourist zones.

One "zone" is in Russia's far east, near the border with North Korea. The others would be in the Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad, a remote southern spot near the Sea of Azov, and in the mountainous Altai republic in Siberia.

But industry specialists say nothing has been done to develop the zones, and they are too far off the beaten track to attract serious investment.

"These four areas are not a real project, and they will never work because they can't generate any income in those places," says Boris Belotserkovsky, chairman of the Unikum Group, Russia's biggest producer of gambling equipment.

He says the ban on gambling is "like prohibition on alcohol. It will just drive the business underground."

Yesterday, the military board hearing the case of Lt. Dan Choi, who told the truth about his sexual orientation on the Rachel Maddow show, moved to toss him from the military under the Don't Ask/Don't Tell policy (even though they consider him an asset to the military). Since the policy was instituted, more than 5,000 LGBT soldiers have been dismissed from service. At a time when we are fighting two (illegal, immoral) wars and with declining enlistment in America's military, this policy is not only unjust, but it is just plain stupid. For those of you who do not know the story of Dan Choi, he is a West Point graduate, an Iraq war veteran and an Arab-speaking linguist. (Jeez, think we might need this guy right now?) Here's a guy who wants to serve his country in spite of the fact that he is denied many civil rights accorded to his heterosexual counterparts. Sorry, but I have to ask the question: Do the military and Barack Obama even have a clue here? Oh, I can hear my conservative compatriots blustering now, "Well, he should have kept his mouth shut." To them I say, "I have a better idea. Let's make America the country it claims to be instead." Freedom isn't conditional here. It's not based on race, gender or sexual orientation. There are no exception clauses in the U.S. Constitution. And, by the way, we're telling those in harm's way that we're fighting for freedom. Are we really?

The LGBT community is tired of hearing about how Obama has only had six months in office. We're tired of the empty promises with no concrete actions, such as his comment earlier this week, "Gays will be happy by the end of my administration." Well, we really do not have any evidence of that. In fact, we evidence to the contrary, such as the Obama administration's memo defending the constitutionality of DOMA. It's unconstitutional. Period. We're tired of the "bipartisanship" drivel, and that's exactly what it is. We didn't elect Barack Obama to sell the country up the river in his quest to get the leftover GOP junk on board behind every change that must be made. I can assure you that the GOP would be ramming bills through with blatant disregard for bipartisanship if the situation was reversed. The people of this nation overwhelmingly elected Barack Obama because they had absolutely no faith in the GOP's plans and policies. Since Obama took office, the GOP has not offered one idea or plan to solve the country's ills. Instead, they've spent their time blocking progress and standing on their sanctimonious "family values" platform.

And while we're at it, let's address that issue because, while many conservatives say that the bad behavior of its elected officials (read: infidelity) has nothing to do with the LGBT community being denied marriage rights, the fact is that it most certainly does. If marriage needs protection, it's from heterosexuals who take their marriage vows lightly. And many of them happen to be politicians. Our friend, David Vitter, still makes calls to his Louisiana constituents inviting them to his family values-based town hall meetings. Hypocrite. How about Mark Sanford? Now we're finding out that he crossed the line with six additional women other than his mistress in Argentina. But don't sweat it. He's actually only had sex with two, his wife and his mistress. I guess, by GOP standards, Sanford can still put himself in the family values column. Hypocrite. Then, there's Gingrich and Ensign, still active in politics. Hypocrites. I haven't forgotten Craig, but he's no longer serving. Nor have I missed the wayward Democrats, Edwards, Clinton and Spitzer, but they are no longer in office. Clinton was impeached, but not removed. Edwards is a private citizen (and was, by the way, when he cheated on his wife). Spitzer resigned, but I believe the GOP calls for his impeachment started about an hour after the story broke. So, I think maybe we should call for the impeachment of Ensign, Vitter and Sanford since they are still in office. After all, impeachment doesn't apply just to the values-challenged Democrats. It should apply across the board. As for Gingrich, everybody knows what he's up to. He's a serial cheater gearing up for 2012 with all this religious-based nonsense. His latest political move is to convert to Catholicism for his wife (a woman he cheated with on his previous wife, no less). That is the ultimate in hypocrisy. Frankly, I know several Republicans and I'm finding that most of them wish he'd fall off the edge of the earth.

There are a couple of points here. First, the GOP - supposedly the party of 'small' government - doesn't believe in "big government" programs designed to improve the lives of the American people. Yet, it has no problem telling the American people how to conduct their personal lives and who they can and cannot marry. If that isn't big, intrusive government, what is? Secondly, there is plenty that Barack Obama can do to nullify Don't Ask/Don't Tell. What, you ask? As Commander-in-Chief, he can suspend Don't Ask/Don't Tell. Then he can begin the process of having that unjust law repealed by the Congress. Harry S. Truman didn't wait for everyone to be 'on board' when he instructed the military to desegregate. It may have taken time, but Truman got the process rolling by utilizing the Executive Order.

The fact is, Barack Obama is a political coward. That's not what the country needed.