G09749

Stephen Marshall's new book about the Liberal Elite
Profile

GWHunta

rank: Rebel
points: 80
occupation: Open Source Intelligence Analysis, SOM, LTD.
location: Wetmore, US
Info

Subscribe
Unsubscribe
Status
Info

biography:
Small town, working class from Michigan's Upper Peninsula. 1990 went to work for the MDOC; the very forefront of the U.S. Prison / Industrial Complex.

Learned there, the hard way, that if I wasn't one of them; "they" would be pit against me.

Survived thus far in spite of the long, dangerous and mine-filled path traveled and I've learned much along the way.

I'd like to now share these lessons and am actively seeking the assistance of those less war torn and weary than I, to help spread the Truth regarding our Collective Path.

New Favorite Quote:

"What kills a skunk is the publicity it gives itself."

Abraham Lincoln

Old Standby:

"Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is a force. And like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

~George Washington

currently reading:

“Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamental Islam” ~ Robert Dreyfuss



“Debacle: The American Failure in Iran” ~ Michael Ledeen & William Lewis



“May God Forgive US” ~ Welch

currently watching:

“Assassins” as performed by the Northern Michigan University Theatre Class

currently listening to:

Peter Gabriel’s “Long Walk Home” musical score from the “Rabbit Proof Fence”.

Robert Plant’s “Fate of Nations”

blog

Ignoring the lessons of 1929

B24286 / Mon, 16 Jul 2007 09:11:21 / Civil Liberties

The economic and financial landscape of 2007 bears striking similarities to 1929. Back then, there were large, unregulated pool operators and other insiders constantly muscling the tape in whatever direction they chose. The public, too, was involved, thinking the country was experiencing a new era. Meanwhile, business began deteriorating in the spring of 1929, though the partying in stocks lasted until the fall.

To give you a flavor of those times, I’d like to quote from Frederick Lewis Allen’s “Only Yesterday,” which is one of my favorite books about 1929:

“Mergers of industrial corporations and of banks were taking place with greater frequency than ever before, prompted not merely by the desire to reduce overhead expenses and avoid the rigors of cut-throat competition, but often by sheer corporate megalomania. And every rumor of a merger or a split-up or an issue of rights was the automatic signal for a leap in the prices of the stocks affected — until it became altogether too tempting to the managers of many a concern to arrange a split-up or a merger or an issue rights not without a canny eye to their own speculative fortunes.”

Obviously, I don’t need to point out how similar that is to the practices we are seeing today.

Today, too, there are pool operators, in the form of leveraged-buyout (LBO) and hedge funds, both of which borrow money to invest. And, just like their predecessors, who ignored macroeconomic and corporate deterioration, they are partying as never before. In reading the following passage from Allen’s 1931 book, you have to remind yourself that it’s a portrait not of 2007 but 1929:

“One could indulge in all manner of dubious financial practices with an unruffled conscience so long as prices rose. The Big Bull Market covered a multitude of sins. It was a golden day for the promoter, and his name was legion.”

I think that for this current cycle, “promoter” should be changed to “hedge fund.”

Turning to the economy, Allen wrote: “Though the shelves of manufacturing companies and jobbers and retailers were not overloaded, the shelves of the ultimate consumer and the shelves of the distributors of securities were groaning. Trouble was brewing — not the same sort of trouble which had visited the country in 1921, but trouble nonetheless. Still, however, the cloud in the summer sky looked no bigger than a man’s hand.”

That’s where we are now. The economy continues to deteriorate under the surface. Proof that its engine of strength, the consumer, is faltering?

Problems cited by many large retailers, whether that be Wal-Mart Stores (WMT, news, msgs), Sears Holdings (SHLD, news, msgs), Target (TGT, news, msgs) or various purveyors of specialty goods. And, when The Home Depot (HD, news, msgs) lowered expectations last week, it chose the politically incorrect words — “housing slump” — to pinpoint the source of its troubles.

Meantime, the stock market is powered by gargantuan speculative forces. With every day and week that passes, speculation becomes that much more intense. (I was amazed to find out that trading volume on a recent Thursday in China eclipsed all the rest of Asia combined. Not that trading volume is always a perfect measure of speculative activity, but in this case, I think it probably is.)

In this cycle, I don’t believe we’ll get to the point where the public is back to claiming it’s a new era. That was done in the 1998-2000 go-round, and only the real-estate mania saved it from an extraordinary amount of post-stock-bubble pain.

The public won’t be back — because its money is tied up in real estate, which will continue to sink.

Make no mistake about it: The tightening of credit has (and will) radically alter the housing market — witness the softening of home prices nearly everywhere in the country as inventory builds and sales slow.

The deteriorating economy is a process that has a long way to go, even though Wall Street tries to throw a party every day that bad news does not absolutely pummel it into submission. No amount of hedge-fund and LBO speculation is going to make the average consumer whole again. Thus, I continue to see no way forward other than a recession and, at some point, a dislocation in the stock market.

Until the transient success of speculation comes to an end, I encourage folks to think about that ultimate unraveling — making sure they can either explain to themselves why it is not very likely or, if they expect events to unfold as I do, have a plan for preparing and/or reacting.

Finally, although it’s impossible to predict the timing, I am certain of one thing: When this unsustainable environment finally ends in tears, people will ask, “How could we have known?” — when all that would have been required was a little understanding of financial history.

by Bill Fleckenstein

terrible bad average good great Vote: vote   Avg: N/A   Votes: 0   Comments: 20 [Add]

Karl Rove in Marquette? To meet the Dilberts.

B24024 / Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:11:56 / Civil Liberties

Rove Says the “Nation” is Fighting Two Wars

IRON MOUNTAIN — For the second time in three years a high-profile member of the Republican Party has traveled to Marquette to address a gathering of GOP supporters. Presidential adviser Karl Rove was the featured speaker Saturday evening at the Marquette County Republican Party’s annual Reagan Day Dinner.

The dinner was a GOP fund-raiser for Michigan’s 1st Congressional District.

During the 2004 presidential campaign, President George W. Bush spoke before thousands of U.P. citizens at a July 13 campaign rally at the Superior Dome.

“I was the one that recommended the president visit Marquette,” said Rove.

Rove said the president’s initial response was, “Marquette … where?”

“On his way back from Marquette, the president phoned me from Air Force One and told me he had attended a fantastic rally in Marquette. I knew then that I wanted to visit the Upper Peninsula,” Rove said.

A sold-out room welcomed the presidential adviser as well as a number of local and state GOP leaders to the Marquette Holiday Inn. Secret Service agents were on hand to watch over protesters gathered along the U.S. 41 corridor and to ensure Rove’s safety.

Many of the GOP supporters in attendance were part of a growing campaign encouraging State Rep. Tom Casperson, R-Escanaba, to challenge incumbent U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Menominee.

“I am honored to attend your Reagan Day dinner. (President Reagan) was a great man. He restored our military, restored our national confidence and oversaw the fall of the Soviet Union.

(President Reagan) was an optimistic leader who was an advocate of freedom,” Rove said.

Rove addressed the Democrats’ control of Congress, their plans to raise taxes and their outlook on the war in Iraq.

“The Democrats have been in charge of Congress for 120 days, but to many, it seems more like 120 years,” Rove said. “Their proposed tax plan will target the middle class. It will raise government spending while cutting defense spending. (The Democrats) want to spend your money on pet projects. Higher taxes will only kill economic growth. High taxes certainly have not helped improve Michigan’s economy. Any legislation containing tax increases that is sent to President Bush’s desk will be vetoed,” Rove said.

The presidential adviser said America is involved in fighting two wars.

“We are fighting the war on terror in the Middle East and the war at home. How do younk think our troops feel when they listen to the news and hear Democratic leaders such as Senator Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi say the war is lost or they hear of leaders voting to cut off spending to the troops?” Rove questioned.

“This war has affected all of us. All of us here know of someone who is serving in the Middle East. The war on terror has been coming for decades,” he said.

Rove said the war began long before the attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001.

“There was the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1984. The first World Trade Center bombing in 1993. The “Blackhawk down” incident. The bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in 2000,” said Rove.

“It all culminated with (bin Laden’s) attack on Sept. 11. The extremists hate the prosperity of the West and, more specifically, the prosperity of the United States,” Rove said.

“If we win in Iraq, it will mark the beginning of the end of the global war on terror. If we pull out of Iraq and the insurgents win, it will mark the beginning of a new global war. If we pull our troops back home, the insurgents will bring the war to America,” he said.

“The nature of our enemy is to be ruthless, cunning and patient. They will use innocent women and children as decoys to bring death to our troops. It is a culture of death. Like in the case of the cold war, we have to prevail,” Rove said.

Rove said he is optimistic about the 2008 election. “Republicans must get back into the fight. I hope (Rep. Tom Casperson) makes the right choice and runs for Congress. Republicans believe in the values held by most Americans.”

State Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Zeeland, one of five GOP representatives attending the Reagan Day dinner, told the Daily News that Rove’s visit to the U.P. was an unofficial kick-off to the 2008 election.

“Having someone such as Karl Rove address party members and leaders helps rally support for the GOP and encourages people to seek public office and help support those who are running for office,” Huizenga said.

Casperson told The Daily News he expects to make a formal announcement on his decision whether to run for Congress in early September.

By Pete Frecchio, Staff Writer

Pete Frecchio’s e-mail address is pfrecchio@ironmountaindailynews.com.

And from the Charlevoix County Republicans it’s Meet the Dilberts.

This last Saturday evening Wes Dilworth and his son, Ted, went to the Reagan Day Dinner in Marquette by the Marquette Republican Party. The key note speaker was Karl Rove, Deputy Chief of Staff to the President. Karl has been credited for Bush’s victories since his Texas Governor days.

Ted wrote a high school term paper on Karl (by his own choice) and was thrilled to meet him as evidenced by the pictures. Karl gave a very informative speech and was very much open to questions. John and Phyllis Haggard were also in attendence, as was Representative Kevin Elsenheimer.

(by his own choice) Then why the disclaimer Wes?

Now I knwo why KARL ROVE WAS IN MARQUETTE?

To meet the Dilberts.

Justice, then Peace

terrible bad average good great Vote: vote   Avg: 5.00   Votes: 1   Comments: 4 [Add]

Karl Rove in Marquette?

B23973 / Tue, 26 Jun 2007 09:11:25 / Intelligence

President Bush’s top advisor, Karl Rove, came to the UP this weekend.

He spoke at the Marquette County Republican Party’s annual Ronald Reagan Dinner Saturday, in celebration of Lincoln Day at the Holiday Inn in Marquette, MI.

“‘Karl’s very interested in Michigan and what’s going on,” says local party chairman Joel Westrom. “He’s concerned about our economy and concerned about our leadership, but more importantly, he’s interested in what’s going on here.”

Anyone else interested in what’s going on here can call Westrom at 906-360-0020 or send him an e-mail at:

joel@marquettegop.com

How Cheney Exerts Influence

THIS BRINGS US BACK to Karl Rove’s visit to Marquette to rally the troops and survey the field of battle in the Great Lakes State. While a case could be made that a trip to the Upper Peninsula of Michigan is a great way to beat the neo-tropical summer heat in Washington, Rove is not the kind of guy to just throw a dart at the map, just aiming for someplace north of the 45th parallel or higher. He is a relentless competitor, ever “On the Offensive,” to use a phrase from Greenberg et al.

I am not sure I would have picked Bart Stupak as a potential prey for a GOP pick-up in Michigan, but I am not as smart as Karl Rove. The Prussian military theorist, Clausewitz, cautioned military leaders to anticipate the independent will of the opposition as part of the inevitable fog and friction of warfare.

Karl Rove looks like he is trying to create a bit of friction for the Michigan Democratic Party way up north.

G. Tracy Mehan, III, served at EPA in the administrations of both Presidents Bush and in the cabinet of former Michigan Governor John Engler as director of the Office of the Great Lakes. He is a consultant in Arlington, VA, and an adjunct professor at George Mason University School of Law.

How Bush’s Brain Ended U.P. in Marquette

Justice, then Peace

ROVE = LYING WAR MONGER

“Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after the process of grotesque self-deception.”
~Mark Twain

Sometimes no.......

terrible bad average good great Vote: vote   Avg: 5.00   Votes: 3   Comments: 25 [Add]

Can America Face Reality?

B23785 / Thu, 14 Jun 2007 06:51:11 / Intelligence

If the government responds to the coming changes by attempting to remain a superpower no matter what, there is no way to underestimate the harm.

The numbers speak for themselves.

Soon we’ll no longer have the resources to remain a military superpower and sustain a livable society that is anything like what we know today.

It happened to England; it happened to Russia; it’s about to happen to us.

England sustained the transformation more or less gracefully; it lost its dominance while retaining its essential character.

Russia is still in a period of transformation, but has remained a player thanks to its oil reserves.

Europe in general – France, Germany, Italy, and Spain (all world powers in the fairly recent past) – is creating a post-national society, the most experimental form of governance since America’s revolution.

We have no appreciable oil, and we no longer have a manufacturing base.

So what will the United States do? Sanely recognize its declining status and act accordingly, or make one last ignoble stab to retain its position by force?

Half a century ago James Baldwin wrote: “Confronted with the impossibility of remaining faithful to one’s beliefs, and the equal impossibility of becoming free of them, one can be driven to the most inhuman excesses.”

Americans believe they’re “No. 1,” destined to lead the world. That is the America that’s over. If we insist on that illusion, then this world is in for tough times.

We will neither hold on to what we have nor create what we might have, but we will wreak untold harm (if we don’t destroy the species altogether).

Or we can face and embrace reality. And that reality is:

There is no such thing as “No. 1” ... there is no such thing as an ideal destined country that is better than any other … there is only us, doing the best we can, trying to live free and sanely, within limits that are about to become only too clear.

Our glory days are done. What’s next?

Remember, we’re not talking about the far future. We’re talking about the next decade.

No country gets two centuries anymore. The 21st will be China’s century.

That’s what $4-plus a gallon means, and nothing can stop it.

So: How will we change?

But the question “How will we change?” is really the question “How will I change?”

Because history isn’t a spectator sport. It’s you and me.

Everything depends on whether we side with reality or illusion.

Face reality, and we have a chance. Cling to illusion, and we are lost.

The America we’ve known is over – very soon.

The America we can create is up to us.

Peace?

(Link)

terrible bad average good great Vote: vote   Avg: N/A   Votes: 0   Comments: 29 [Add]

Understanding Common Climate Claims

B23765 / Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:49:03 / Environment

ABSTRACT

The issue of man induced climate change involves not the likelihood of dangerous consequences, but rather their remote possibility.

The main areas of widespread agreement
(namely that global mean temperature has risen rather irregularly about 0.6C over the past century, that atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide have increased about 30% over the past century, and that carbon dioxide by virtue of its infrared absorption bands should contribute to warming) do not imply dangerous warming.

Indeed, we know that doubling carbon dioxide should lead to a heating of about 3.7 watts per square meter, and that man made greenhouse heating is already about 2.7 watts per square meter.

Thus, we have seen less warming than would be predicted by any model showing more than about 0.8 degrees C warming for a doubling of carbon dioxide.

This is consistent with independent identifications of negative feedbacks.

Alarming scenarios, on the other hand, are typically produced by models predicting 4 degrees C. After the fact, such models can only be made to simulate the observed warming by including numerous unknown factors which are chosen to cancel most of the warming to the present, while assuming that such cancellation will soon disappear.

Alarm is further promoted by such things as claiming that a warmer world will be stormier even though basic theory, observations, and even model outputs point to the opposite.

With respect to Kyoto, it is generally agreed that Kyoto will do virtually nothing about climate no matter what is assumed.

Given that projected increases in carbon dioxide will only add incrementally to the greenhouse warming already present, it seems foolish to speak of avoiding dangerous thresholds.

If one is concerned, the approach almost certainly is to maximize adaptability.

1. INTRODUCTION

After spending years describing the physics of climate to audiences concerned with global warming, I came to the realization that I was speaking to people who were not aware of the basic premises of the issue.

The listeners were typically under the impression that the case for climate alarm was self-evident and strong, and that concern for the underlying
physics constituted simply nit-picking in order to see if there were any remotely possible chinks in the otherwise solid case.

Given that most people (including scientists) can rarely follow 15 minute discussions of somewhat complex science, the conclusion of the listeners is
that the objections are too obscure to challenge their basic prejudice.

I decided, therefore, to examine why people believed what they believed.

What I found was that they had been presented mainly three claims for which widespread scientific agreement existed. While these claims may be contested, they are indeed widely accepted.

The only problem is that these claims do not suggest alarm. Rather, upon careful analysis, they make clear that catastrophic implications are grossly unlikely, but cannot be rigorously disproved.

Thus, the real situation is that the supporters of alarm are the real skeptics who cling to alarm against widely accepted findings. The profound confusion pertaining to this situation is only reinforced by quibbling over the basic points of agreement.

Such quibbling merely convinces the public that the basic points of agreement must be tantamount to support for alarm.

We will begin by analyzing the popular consensus.

View the attached PDF for the full paper by:

RICHARD S. LINDZEN
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Sciences
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

terrible bad average good great Vote: vote   Avg: 3.75   Votes: 8   Comments: 0 [Add]
Displaying 1 thru 5 of 95
Login

Sign up for the GNN newsletter to get the first word on video premieres and breaking news.

Read the GNN FAQ for information about the site, forum rules and other GNN 2.0 information.

Optimized for FireFox
To download the Firefox web browser, visit mozilla.com

  • Advertise With GNN
  • SUPPORT GNN!

    TEES/DVDS @ GNN STORE

  • Bloggers' Rights at EFF
  • GNN'S FIRST FEATURE FILM
    NOW OUT ON DVD

  • When I Came Home DVD Released