AMBASSADOR JOHN BOLTON: We Shouldn't Rescue Europe

By Ambassador John Bolton

What we're seeing in Greece is a European problem and it should not be solved by the United States. 
The Greek financial crisis is really a European Union ("EU") political crisis as much as it is economic. European Monetary Union, creating the Euro, was designed to facilitate "ever closer union" as well as to create a common currency. 
Under the Euro, individual EU member governments continued to pursue their own fiscal policies without having to worry about consequences for the values of their national currencies, because everything was masked by the Euro. 
Now, as Greece's unsustainable situation becomes clear, and as others -- Spain and Portugal, for example -- the Euro itself is under challenge. That is not surprising, given the Euro's peculiar status as a currency without a government. 
Now the European union must decide whether to change its structure or save its currency. It will be a painful decision for them to make either way, but they are the ones who created the problem. And they are surely capable of solving it. As a European problem, and very much a political one, it should not be solved by the United States. 
There is no United States interest in rescuing the Euro or European political integration, certainly not with American taxpayer dollars. In fact, the IMF is involved in the Greek rescue package only because the EU, and particularly Germany didn't want all of the responsibility.
That is not a sufficient reason to the U.S. to rescue Europe from its own mistakes.

UN-believable: Because When You Think ‘Women’s Rights’ You Think ‘Iran’

By Doug Powers • April 30, 2010 12:11 PM

From the “It’s a little like hiring John Edwards to be your marriage counselor but way worse” file, we find yet another pathetic reason the US should have nothing to do with the United Nations:

NEW YORK — Without fanfare, the United Nations this week elected Iran to its Commission on the Status of Women, handing a four-year seat on the influential human rights body to a theocratic state in which stoning is enshrined in law and lashings are required for women judged “immodest.”

Just days after Iran abandoned a high-profile bid for a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council, it began a covert campaign to claim a seat on the Commission on the Status of Women, which is “dedicated exclusively to gender equality and advancement of women,” according to its website.

They left out that women’s cleavage causes earthquakes, and women are arrested and who knows what else for the crime of being suntanned.

Iranian activists circulated and submitted a petition asking that member states oppose Iran’s appointment, but that piece of paper was apparently tossed on the UN’s pile of unpaid parking tickets and quickly forgotten.

Cash for Cloture

Dec 28, 2009

by John Goodman

This is adapted from a Dana Milbank column in The Washington Post:

The Louisiana Purchase: $100 million in extra Medicaid money for the Bayou State, requested by Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.).

The Cornhusker Kickback:  $100 million in extra Medicaid money, this time for Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.).

U Con:  $100 million meant for a medical center in Connecticut for Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.)

Gator Aid: A grandfather clause will allow Floridians to preserve their pricey Medicare Advantage program from cuts imposed in the other states.

Handout Montana: Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) secured Medicare coverage for anybody exposed to asbestos — as long as they worked in a mine in Libby, Mont.

Iowa Pork: Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) won more Medicare money for low-volume hospitals of the sort commonly found in Iowa.

Omaha Prime Cuts: Nebraska’s Nelson won a “carve out” provision that would reduce fees for Mutual of Omaha and other Nebraska insurers.

Dakota Payoff: Sens. Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad, both North Dakota Democrats, will enjoy a provision bringing higher Medicare payments to hospitals and doctors in “frontier counties” of states such as — let’s see here — North Dakota!

Hawaii Aloha: Hawaii, with two Democratic senators, will get richer payments to hospitals that treat many uninsured people.

Wolverine Bonanza: Michigan, home of two other Democrats, will earn higher Medicare payments and some reduced fees for Blue Cross/Blue Shield.

What socialism means in Vermont:  Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) is getting larger Medicaid payments for his state (neighboring Massachusetts will get some, too).

New Underground Economy

New Underground Economy

by Richard W. Rahn
The underground or "black" economy is rapidly rising, and the fault is mainly due to government policies.

Here is the evidence. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) released a report last week concluding that 7.7 percent of U.S. households, containing at least 17 million adults, are unbanked (i.e. those who do not have bank accounts), and an "estimated 17.9 percent of U.S. households, roughly 21 million, are underbanked" (i.e., those who rely heavily on nonbank institutions, such as check cashing and money transmitting services). As an economy becomes richer and incomes rise, the normal expectation is that the proportion of the unbanked population falls and does not rise as is now happening in the United States.

Tax revenues are falling far more rapidly at the federal, state and local level than would be expected by the small drop in real gross domestic product (GDP) and changes in tax law that have occurred since the recession began. The currency in circulation outside the U.S. Treasury, Federal Reserve banks and the vaults of depository institutions - that is, the currency held by individuals and businesses - has grown by 13.3 percent in the last two years, while real nominal (not inflation-adjusted) GDP has not grown at all, and real (inflation-adjusted) GDP incomes have fallen by more than 3 percent. With the growth of electronic means of payment and financial service providers, it would be expected that the currency component of GDP would fall, not rise.

The underground economy refers to both legal activities, such as often found in construction and services industries where taxes are not withheld and paid, and illegal activities, such as drug dealing and prostitution.

Countries such as the United States, Switzerland and Japan historically have had relatively small, nonreporting and/or illegal sectors, a typical estimate being 13 percent of GDP.

Most European countries have had somewhat larger underground sectors (typically 20 percent or so) in part because of the desire to escape higher tax rates. Italy and some of the other Southern European countries are believed to have underground sectors that account for 30 percent or more of all economic activity.

I recall an Italian finance minister telling a few of us at a meeting a couple of decades ago that, for policy purposes, he assumed that "the economy was 40 percent larger than what was reported." In some developing countries and/or highly corrupt countries, underground or "off the books" activities are estimated to be as high as 70 percent of all economic activity.

The FDIC report about the size of the unbanked or underbanked sector in the U.S. should be of concern because those who do not use the banking system often have to pay higher fees to cash checks, pay bills (e.g., money orders, etc.), or transmit funds.

People who keep their savings in cash at home rather than in banks make themselves easier prey for criminals and are more likely to lose their money to fire, flood, or just neglect. Not surprisingly, a majority (71 percent) of the unbanked have household incomes of less than $30,000 per year.

There are many reasons people do not have bank accounts. Banks, because of the "know your customer" and other anti-money laundering regulations, make it difficult for nonestablished people, such as the young and transient, as well as legal and illegal immigrants, to open bank accounts.

Also, many of these same regulations are responsible for the rise in bank fees, which are a particular burden for low-income people. You can be sure that every time Congress passes some new law or the IRS implements some new regulation to "get tax cheats," much of the real burden of these compliance costs will fall on those least able to afford it, while those intent on finding their way around it will do so.

People also avoid having bank accounts because they are vulnerable to asset seizure, judgments, levies, etc. Increasingly, bankers and others who provide financial services are forced by governments to spy and snitch on their own customers, and this is a real turnoff for many people, which causes them to find other ways of maintaining financial privacy.

Many studies have shown that when people believe the taxes they are required to pay are reasonable and the political leaders tend to spend their tax dollars wisely, tax compliance rises, and vice versa. In the United States, there is increased evidence that many tax dollars are not being spent wisely and are often used to pay off political cronies.

Over the past year in particular, the public has become aware that many in Washington who advocate higher taxes and argue that everyone has a responsibility to pay taxes are themselves not complying with the tax laws and regulations.

When you have a secretary of the Treasury and the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee (the tax writing committee) accused of cheating on their taxes, it greatly undermines the moral authority of the tax collectors, making the common citizens feel like chumps and, hence, much more willing to try to legally avoid or illegally evade taxes themselves.

The evidence is unambiguous; governments cannot increase tax compliance and decrease the size of the underground economy by ever increasing and more onerous regulations.

It is no accident that those governments that allow their citizens a high degree of personal and financial liberty, including financial privacy, and spend taxpayer dollars wisely, honestly and competently, have much smaller underground sectors than corrupt and oppressive governments. Washington, take note.

the Louisiana Purchase.

Staffers on Capitol Hill were calling it the Louisiana Purchase.
On the eve of Saturday's showdown in the Senate over health-care reform, Democratic leaders still hadn't secured the support of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), one of the 60 votes needed to keep the legislation alive. The wavering lawmaker was offered a sweetener: at least $100 million in extra federal money for her home state.
And so it came to pass that Landrieu walked onto the Senate floor midafternoon Saturday to announce her aye vote -- and to trumpet the financial "fix" she had arranged for Louisiana. "I am not going to be defensive," she declared. "And it's not a $100 million fix. It's a $300 million fix."

Read the rest of the article here

More on the Health Care bill

FYI | Sen. Coburn Weighs the Reid Bill: It’s 20.8 Pounds

Here are some additional findings by the numbers:
2,074 — pages in the bill
$1.2 billion — cost to taxpayers per page
70 — new government programs authorized by the bill
1,697 — times the Secretary of Health and Human Services is given authority to create, determine, or define things in the bill
24 million — people left without health insurance
$8 billion — taxes levied on uninsured individuals
$25 billion — additional Medicaid mandates placed on states
$28 billion — new taxes on employers not providing government-approved plans
$118 billion — cuts to Medicare Advantage
$465 billion — total cuts to Medicare
$494 billion — revenue from new taxes/fees levied on American families and businesses
$2.5 trillion — cost for the first ten years of full implementation of the legislation

Fix The Banking System In 4 Steps

By Dylan Ratigan

I spoke today on the Morning Meeting about the four steps the government could take to fix the U.S. banking system and stop the ongoing and expanding corruption of our country. These simple solutions come from the litany of people that I speak with who seek to change the mega-casino our government has built during the past 10 years back to one built on investors, innovators and workers creating things that benefit society.  Unfortunately, our current leaders want to take the easy road of sustaining the casino economy with what I like to call the Magic Money Machine.  Except as with all magic, there's actually a trick; in this case, it is a large bill that will be left to those of us unfortunate enough to still be around when it comes due.  Here are the four pieces of regulation that taxpayers should be demanding from their leaders:

1. Inject transparency, primarily to bring almost $600 trillion of crooked insurance scams to the forefront.  Force almost all swaps onto exchanges, not just the 20% as current proposed reform does.

Secretary Geithner, Chairman Frank and Chairman Dodd are protecting the last of the Wall Street secret money-making schemes. They don't want to force transparency on this market because it would disclose the fraud this massive bank scheme is -- a taxpayer subsidized secret insurance market which sells cheap insurance to hedge funds, power and food and energy companies, and makes for huge profits at banks and insurance companies. Insurance and idle speculation in secret is a brilliant way for banks and other financial services companies to make money (who doesn't want to collect insurance premiums every month for something you'll never have to pay for?!) And a great way to make oil, food and electricity company CEOs richer as they pay less for their insurance. One problem -- they are all surfing on the taxpayers back to the tune of $24 trillion at risk last I checked -- and the U.S. government is the one letting them do it. Still. Now bigger than ever.

2. Demand capital to back Wall Street's gambling.

In Vegas, you need to have actual money to gamble. Your own money. It's crazy, but true. Even today, in many cases more than ever, U.S. banks use America's FDIC insured safe deposits to fund their own mad bonus-seeking speculation. Once the banks blow through that -- they borrow from the biggest money printing house in the world, the U.S. Federal Reserve to do the same thing. This is truly insane. The banks and their traders keep the upside. You, the taxpayer, keep the downside. No one else in the world can pay themselves billions to take infinite risk with little or no money down, except a big bank CEO. And we thought they were good at their jobs making all that money, when all they did was rig the game using our government to do it.

3. Enact a tax-code to encourage long-term investment and discourage short-term profit. Fortunes should not be made in minutes but over years through the creation of value to society.

  

As long as the easiest way for a man or woman to make money is to spend their day clicking for dollars, why would they bother doing all the work of investing in the long-term economic development of private business in America? Tax code in general should encourage investment, jobs, and innovation in America and discourage idle speculation as the easiest way for a college kid to get rich.  There are sensible ways to use tax policy to encourage this that do not hamper liquidity.

4. Break up the Too Big To Fail banking institutions. Start with Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan. Right Now.

      

How do you expect any other business to compete with the chosen few who are guaranteed profits? The more risk they take, the more they make. Why do you think they invented a fake $600 Trillion secret derivative market in the first place? Bigger bonuses baby. All upside. No downside. Thank you Uncle Sam. Thank you Secretary Geithner.

Dylan Ratigan On Corporate Communism

Dylan Ratigan On Corporate Communism: "$24 Trillion Of National Capital Is Being Sucked Into A Broken Banking System At Our Expense"

• "The beneficiaries of an ongoing $24 trillion taxpayer-funded bailout...$24 trillion dollars."

• "That is national capital that is being sucked into a broken banking system at the expense of the rest of our country.  They continue to use "Too Big To Fail" as blackmail to the taxpayer in order to get us to provide capital to them."

• "It is a system that takes resources from the citizenry and redistributes it to a tiny elite."

• "A handful of weak, un-competitive, outdated companies and industries are purchasing control of the American political system in order to stay in business using their cronyism.

• "It is coming at the direct expense of the rest of us in this nation.  And it's a total betrayal of everything that represents America."

Taxing Health Insurance

Oct 6, 2009

by John Goodman

Under the Senate Finance Committee’s modified chairman’s mark, beginning in 2013, all plans (with a few exceptions) that cost more than $8,000 for individuals and $21,000 for families would be subject to a tax of 40% on the excess. Although the tax would be imposed on insurance providers and employers, the burden would be passed on to consumers. This is from the Joint Economic Committee Minority:

If companies seek to maintain absolute profit levels by increasing premiums, the high cost tax of 40% will not only add $1,600 to the cost of a $25,000 plan, but the added $1,600 to the cost of the plan will then be subject to the high cost tax, which will add another $640 to the plan’s cost. This cycle of tax increases followed by premium increases will result in a total increase of $2,667 to a $25,000 plan. Under this scenario, the result is that the stated tax rate of 40% would translate into an effective tax rate of 67%.

John Goodmans health policy blog

Medicaid Numbers Don’t Add Up

FYI | Medicaid Numbers Don’t Add Up

Oct 2, 2009

by John Goodman

This is from a Wall Street Journal editorial:

Currently, the federal government pays about 57 cents out of every dollar the states spend on Medicaid, though the “matching rate” ranges as high as 76% in some states. That would rise to 95% [under the Baucus bill] —but only for five years. After that, who knows? It all depends on which budget Congress ends up ruining. Either the states will be slammed, or Washington will extend these extra payments into perpetuity—despite the fact that CBO expects purely federal spending on Medicaid to consume 5% of GDP by 2035 under current law.

Who better to bundle

Regulations intended to shed light on bundling by lobbyists are coming up short. According to an Associated Press review published last week, which compared invitations to fund-raisers hosted by lobbyists and campaign finance reports filed with the Federal Election Commission from March 19 through June, lawmakers have yet to disclose funds they raised at 195 events.
Although the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act requiring lawmakers to report cash “bundled” by lobbyists went into effect in March of this year, Oonly about two-dozen lawmakers between then and June have reported funds raised by lobbyists, the AP found, even though the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act requiring lawmakers to report cash “bundled” by lobbyists went into effect in March of this year. What can a lobbyist do to escape disclosure? Don’t touch the money, don’t take credit, raise less than $16,000 (the threshold for reporting, which does not include contributions from the lobbyist and his/her spouse) or work as an in-house lobbyist for a business, union or trade association and have your employer officially sponsor the event. HLOGA was passed in 2007 in response to the Jack Abramoff scandal, but the AP concludes that “the circumstances under which a member of Congress is legally bound to disclose a lobbyist’s fund-raising are so narrow that, had the law been in effect during Abramoff’s lobbying days, it wouldn’t have exposed much, if any, of his congressional fundraising money trail.” The Hill reported a similar story this week.
From The Capital Eye Blog

Dems lied, transparency died

Senate Finance Committee Democrats have rejected a GOP amendment that would have required a health overhaul bill to be available online for 72 hours before the committee votes.
Republicans argued that transparency is an Obama administration goal. They also noted that their constituents are demanding that they read bills before voting.
The Democrats noted that unlike other committees, the Finance Committee works off conceptual language that describes policies — instead of legislative language that ultimately becomes law, and which the GOP amendment would have required.
Democrats accepted an alternate amendment to make conceptual language available online before a vote.
Currently, the only version of Chairman Max Baucus’s proposal we have is a 223-page draft (PDF) that is written in plain English and explains the bill in conceptual terms. Republicans argued that until the bill is written in legislative language it will be impossible for the CBO to provide an accurate cost estimate.
The Bunning ammendment would have required the committee to have the legislative language of the bill, along with the CBO cost estimate, posted on the internet for 72 hours before a vote.
Democrats argued that waiting for the legislative languange to be written, and for the CBO to evaluate it, would needlessly delay the process by weeks.
“Let’s be honest about it, most people don’t read the legislative language,” Sen. John Kerry said.
The Bunning amendment was defeated by a 12 to 11 vote,
with Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln the only Democrat voting in favor.

Are you crazy? It is broke!!

The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775 - you have had 234 years to get it right; it is broke.
Social Security was established in 1935 - you have had 74 years to get it right; it is broke.
Fannie Mae was established in 1938 - you have had 71 years to get it right; it is broke.
The "War on Poverty" started in 1964 - you have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor"; it hasn't worked and our entire country is broke.
Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965 - you've had 44 years to get it right; they are broke.
Freddie Mac was established in 1970 - you have had 39 years to get it right; it is broke.
Trillions of dollars were spent in the massive political payoffs called TARP, the "Stimulus", the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009... none show any signs of working, although ACORN appears to have found a new victim: the American taxpayer.
And finally, to set a new record:
"Cash for Clunkers" was established in 2009 and went broke in 2009! It took good dependable cars (that were the best some people could afford) and replaced them with high-priced and less-affordable cars, mostly Japanese. A good percentage of the profits went out of the country. And the American taxpayers take the hit for Congress' generosity in burning three billion more of our dollars on failed experiments.
So with a perfect 100% failure! rate and a record that proves that "services" you shove down our throats are failing faster and faster, you want Americans to believe you can be trusted with a government-run health care system?

20% of our entire economy?

With all due respect,

Are you crazy?

Star Parker - Syndicated Columnist

Six years ago I wrote a book called Uncle Sam's Plantation. I wrote the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare state and my own transformation out of it.

I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas -- a poor America on socialism and a wealthy America on capitalism..

I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS), Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (EANF), Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.

A vast sea of perhaps well-intentioned government programs, all initially set into motion in the 1960s, that were going to lift the nation's poor out of poverty.

A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched mindsets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have to do to stay on the plantation?"

Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism created monstrous moral and spiritual problems -- the kind of problems that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their lives over to others.

The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional inner city schools, and broken black families.

Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood what freedom meant and how great this country is.

I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996, passed by a Republican Congress and signed 50 percent.

I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor black communities and replacing it with wealth-producing American capitalism.

But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction.

Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America on socialism.

Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have said, "Thank you, Suh."

Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell Massah in order to get their cash.

There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of Abraham Lincoln.

Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president. And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy to move onto the plantation.

In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much more than short term economic stimulus.

"This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America 's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, healthcare, and education."

Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."

Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department of Energy, the SynfuelsCorporation, and the Department of Education.

Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty."

Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black families are not, with triple the incidence of single-parent homes and out-of-wedlock births.

It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation to move onto the plantation.. Or they can choose personal responsibility and freedom.

Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?

"The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."

Socialized health care reform

Government Health care?? I don't think it would be a good idea for many reasons.
One of the arguments for it is that the cost of our health care is high and keeps going higher. Well yeah!!!
Now let's look at the reasons for that.
First of all is big government intervention, like all the freakin' paper work that's required to remain in practice. A form for this and verification for that, A doctor has to add a few extra people on staff just to complete the paper work properly. Secondly is the insurance, my god, in this sue happy culture we live in a doctor has to have millions of dollars in insurance.
Thirdly the HMO's became the middle man between the insurance companies and the doctors, you know their going to get their share.

Now that's three main reasons for increased cost of medical coverage.
Do you think the doctors are going to absorb those costs???
Hell no, that cost is being past on either to the insurance companies or the government (in the case of our failing medicare and medicaid programs).

These programs were put in place by the Democrat led Congress and Senate.
Now they want to put more of the same expensive, failing policies into effect and into play.
Do I believe they'll succeed? NO!!
But unfortunately they will gain a bit more of a foothold and move their progressive agenda further towards attaining that goal.
Just a little bit at a time till it's accomplished. Patients will win out.

Fine you for not buying health coverage

Am I readin' this right. The Senate Democrats unveiled a bill that says that Americans who refuse to buy affordable medical coverage could be hit with fines of more than $1,000.
The fines could raise an estimated $36 billion over ten years.
Are You freekin' kiddin' me. Talk about your big brother state run government.
Who do these people think they are. OMG

The Cloward-Piven Strategy, A Manufactured Crisis

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis…. …the “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

From this web site of The American Daughter

and this one from the american thinker

and also this site from Truth & Consequeces

It comes in three parts this is the first part with links to the other two.

A must read for all who are concerned about the direction our country is headed.

Cloward and Piven were specific about the kind of "crisis" they were trying to create:

By crisis, we mean a publicly visible disruption in some institutional sphere. Crisis can occur spontaneously (e.g., riots) or as the intended result of tactics of demonstration and protest which either generate institutional disruption or bring unrecognized disruption to public attention.

No matter where the strategy is implemented, it shares the following features:

1. The offensive organizes previously unorganized groups eligible for government benefits but not currently receiving all they can.

2. The offensive seeks to identify new beneficiaries and/or create new benefits.

3. The overarching aim is always to impose new stresses on target systems, with the ultimate goal of forcing their collapse.

Rudy Giuliani cited Cloward and Piven by name as being responsible for "an effort at economic sabotage." He also credited Cloward-Piven with changing the cultural attitude toward welfare from that of a temporary expedient to a lifetime entitlement, an attitude which in-and-of-itself has caused perhaps the greatest damage of all.

As they gleefully observed:
Moreover, this kind of mass influence is cumulative because benefits are continuous. Once eligibility for basic food and rent grants is established, the drain on local resources persists indefinitely.

ACORN's voter rights tactics follow the Cloward-Piven Strategy:

* 1. Register as many Democrat voters as possible, legal or otherwise and help them vote, multiple times if possible.

* 2. Overwhelm the system with fraudulent registrations using multiple entries of the same name, names of deceased, random names from the phone book, even contrived names.

* 3. Make the system difficult to police by lobbying for minimal identification standards.

Cloward and Piven's aspirations for ACORN's voter registration efforts:

By advocating massive, no-holds-barred voter registration campaigns, they [Cloward & Piven] sought a Democratic administration in Washington, D.C. that would re-distribute the nation's wealth and lead to a totalitarian socialist state.

Illegal Immigration

As written elsewhere, the Radical Left's offensive to promote illegal immigration is "Cloward-Piven on steroids." ACORN is at the forefront of this movement as well.

Mortgage Crisis

In the 1980s, groups such as the activists at ACORN began pushing charges of "redlining"-claims that banks discriminated against minorities in mortgage lending. In 1989, sympathetic members of Congress got the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act amended to force banks to collect racial data on mortgage applicants; this allowed various studies to be ginned up that seemed to validate the original accusation.

A 1995 strengthening of the Community Reinvestment Act required banks to find ways to provide mortgages to their poorer communities. It also let community activists intervene at yearly bank reviews, shaking the banks down for large pots of money.
Banks that got poor reviews were punished; some saw their merger plans frustrated; others faced direct legal challenges by the Justice Department.

Enter Barack Obama

The chart puts Barack Obama at the epicenter of an incestuous stew of American radical leftism. Not only are his connections significant, they practically define who he is. Taken together, they constitute a who's who of the American radical left, and guiding all is the Cloward-Piven strategy.

Conspicuous in their absence are any connections at all with any other group, moderate, or even mildly leftist. They are all radicals, firmly bedded in the anti-American, communist, socialist, radical leftist mesh.