ledeagenda.com

From USA Today:

The number of federal workers earning six-figure salaries has exploded during the recession, according to a USA TODAY analysis of federal salary data.
Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession’s first 18 months - and that’s before overtime pay and bonuses are counted.

Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time - in pay and hiring - during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector.

The highest-paid federal employees are doing best of all on salary increases. Defense Department civilian employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 in December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009, the most recent figure available.

When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000.

The trend to six-figure salaries is occurring throughout the federal government, in agencies big and small, high-tech and low-tech. The primary cause: substantial pay raises and new salary rules.

“There’s no way to justify this to the American people. It’s ridiculous,” says Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a first-term lawmaker who is on the House’s federal workforce subcommittee.

Jessica Klement, government affairs director for the Federal Managers Association, says the federal workforce is highly paid because the government employs skilled people such as scientists, physicians and lawyers. She says federal employees make 26% less than private workers for comparable jobs.

More proof of the growing fascist threat and the dire need for a seperation of everything and the State.

WSJ: You Commit Three Felonies A Day

As posted on LewRockwell.com

Today’s Daily Presidential Tracking Poll from Rasmussen:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 28% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -13.

This is reflective of national trends. Voters who strongly approve of the President are falling, while voters who are lining up in opposition are growing. Of course, we would have to ask if any of those ’strongly approve’ voters were ever actually there, given Obama’s ties to the voter-fraud group, ACORN.

Obama is starting to get desperate. Will he use the Swine Flu to force Nationalized Eugenics Health Care on the unaccepting American public? Or will Obama use some other tactics to prop up his support? Let us hope that these voters against Obama are more robust in their resolve than the infancy of their awareness.

From the same administration that released the DHS and MIAC reports, labeling citizens who support the Constitution, Ron Paul and limited Federal government as domestic terrorists, comes this beauty:

On Tuesday, the White House posted a blog that asked supporters to report “fishy” information they come across about the health insurance debate. The appeal was made at the end of the blog, which showed a video that countered a set of online clips that made it look like Obama wanted to eliminate private coverage. 

“There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there,” the blog concludes. “Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.” 

With the request raising the possibility of a kind of Nixonian “enemies list” that would initiate a whole new brand of surveillance over that undertaken during the Bush administration, critics called the move an Orwellian tactic to control the health care debate. 

That’s right, Obama has set up his snitch-line to report those ‘domestic terrorists’ who dare oppose his socialism and unconstitutional government actions.

Consider this: what potential, raw abuses of government/state power await those who dare stand against any political administration who runs afoul of the Constitution? After all, the Department of Homeland Security in it’s, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic And Political Climate” report lists gun owners (pg. 3), opponents of globalization (5), those opposed to abortion (5), same sex marriage (5) and illegal immigration (6), as ‘domestic terrorists’.

Or how about the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report, “The Modern Militia Movement” report which lists those opposed to the New World Order (1), North American Union (4), and universal national service (6) as threats to the American public. Do you fly a Gadsen Flag? The MIAC reports lists you as a domestic terrorist (7). Or how about supporting a third political party? Ron Paul? The Campaign For Liberty? Again, you are a threat to the Homeland (7).

You see, Obama and the cronies moved very, very quickly to establish his enemies list. By working with law enforcement, he is targeting constitutionalists and libertarians for political character assassination in an attempt to marginalize and demean you. He know that adherents to the constitution are the biggest threat to his political agenda and also the biggest opportunity for the Republican party to rebuild. That is he is now going beyond law enforcement and establishing this snitch line only confirms the fact that the American people are waking up, fascism- the total state takeover of our lives- is breathing down our neck if we don’t demand a return to the Constitution, and demand it now.

Well we are going to have a little fun and show this Administration that we are not afraid of his gestapo tactics.

Judge Napolitano writes:

The White House strategy of turning supporters into snitches when they see “fishy” information about the health care debate may run afoul of the law, legal experts say.

“The White House is in bit of a conundrum because of this privacy statute that prohibits the White House from collecting data and storing it on people who disagree with it,” Judge Andrew Napolitano, a FOX News analyst, said Friday. 

“There’s also a statute that requires the White House to retain all communications that it receives. It can’t try to rewrite history by pretending it didn’t receive anything,” he said.

“If the White House deletes anything, it violates one statute. If the White House collects data on the free speech, it violates another statute.”

Napolitano was referring to the Privacy Act of 1974, which was passed after the Nixon administration used federal agencies to illegally investigate individuals for political purposes. Enacted after Richard Nixon’s resignation in the Watergate scandal, the statute generally prohibits any federal agency from maintaining records on individuals exercising their right to free speech.

So what are we going to do? Simple, we are going to email ‘The Messiah’. Make sure that what you write is in opposition to one of his policies, preferably the reason this email address was created in the first place, nationalized health care. Cap and tax or opposition to the stimulus package are also good suggestions. In any event, just email his snitch line- flag@whitehouse.gov, and then our work begins.

You see, as Judge Napolitano writes, it is against the law for Obama to retain these records on political opponents, but it is also against the law for him to delete communications. You see we are going to force the issue to bring attention to the chilling effects of civilian monitoring that was put into place with the creation of the DHS, and put to use against citizens when Obama came into power. We are going to file Freedom Of Information Act requests to obtain our own emails to the President.

Should Obama fail to produce these records, he is in violation of the statue that requires him to retain communications to his office. Should he provide our own email back to us, he violates the Privacy Act of 1974. Either way, he is caught in a catch-22.

The ACLU notes:

The ACLU said in a statement to FOXNews.com that the White House blog is a “bad idea that could send a troublesome message.”

But the organization added, “While it is unclear at this point what the government is doing with the information it is collecting, critics of the administration’s health care proposal should not fear that their names will end up in some government database that could be used to chill their right to free speech.”

Specifics on filing a FOIA request can be found here, but the most important aspect is this: to ask for both a copy of the email, any database that it was collected in and person’s who it may have been forwarded on to. For the record, the address to mail your request to is as follows:

A request made under the FOIA must be submitted in writing, by mail or fax, to the following address:

Office of Administration
FOIA Officer
725 17th Street NW
Washington, DC 20503
Fax: (202) 456-7921

The words FOIA REQUEST should be clearly marked on both the letter and the envelope.

Have fun, and realize this is a smoking gun against unconstitutional Executive and state power. As you get your responses, please let us know so that if necessary we can reverse engineer the President’s enemies list setup.

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”- Edmund Burke

Mr. Bernanke goes to Washington. From La Times:

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner today began the tough sales job on Capitol Hill for the Obama administration’s sweeping overhaul of financial regulations, facing sharp criticism at a Senate hearing for one key proposal — increasing the power of the Federal Reserve to regulate large institutions whose failure would pose a significant risk to the economy.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) and the committee’s top Republican, Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, both told Geithner they did not like the Fed idea, reflecting bipartisan concerns about the central bank’s failure to identify the looming financial crisis and the deep recession.

Key lawmakers are also concerned that giving the Fed more of a direct regulatory role could impede its independence, which they said is crucial to keeping politics out of its responsibility for setting monetary policy.

The questions about the Fed’s role also highlighted the challenges President Obama faces in getting his regulatory overhaul passed into law. The plan, the most comprehensive since the Great Depression, would institute tough, new requirements on large companies who could damage the economy if they fail, add oversight of complex financial derivatives, attempt to rein in executive compensation and create a new agency to oversee consumer financial products.

Most of the key provisions require congressional approval. Geithner is expected to face a similar reception when he testifies before the House Financial Services Committee later today.

Dodd said he had an open mind about whether the Fed should take on the new role, which is one of the major and most controversial components of the Obama administration’s plan. But then he referred to numerous criticisms of the Fed, citing one expert who said giving the agency more power over the financial system was like a parent giving a teenager a faster car after he crashed another one.

Shelby, who has been a strong critic of expanding the role of the Federal Reserve, cited the agency’s independent structure and worried that Congress would not be able to hold it accountable for its new power. He also said the Fed’s performance leading up to the current crisis did not merit additional responsibility. The Fed already is responsible for monetary policy as well as handling some bank supervision and consumer protection roles in the financial system.

Responding to Geithner’s assertion that the Fed was the one government agency that had the expertise to handle the role, Shelby said, “I personally believe this represents a grossly inflated view of the Fed’s expertise.”

Geithner defended the administration’s plan at the Senate Banking Committee hearing, particularly the new role for the Fed, even as he sought to downplay it.

“Our plan is to give it a carefully designed, modest amount of additional authority and clear accountability for the Fed to carry out that mission,” Geithner said. “But we also take some important authority and responsibilities away from the Federal Reserve.”

Most notably, Geithner said the Federal Reserve would lose its authority to write consumer protection rules for consumer financial products such as credit cards and to enforce those rules. Those powers would rest in a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency - itself a controversial proposal, particularly among business groups and some Republicans.

Even senators who largely praised the administration’s overall regulatory plan, such as Dodd and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), criticized the Fed for failing in its consumer protection responsibilities.

But Schumer said he tentatively was supportive of giving the Fed its expanded role to monitor the entire economic system.

“I’m not certain, but I tend to agree that the Fed is the best answer,” he said. “There are no great ones.”

The Obama administration’s regulatory overhaul also creates a new Financial Services Oversight Council to identify emerging risks to the economy. The council would be headed by Geithner and include the Federal Reserve chairman and other financial regulators. Some senators said the council might be better suited than the Fed to supervise and regulate large institutions.

But Geithner said the council would not be as accountable as a single agency and would not be able to act as quickly in a crisis.

“You cannot convene a committee to put out a fire,” he said. “The Federal Reserve is the best positioned to play that role.”

Bailouts, reforms, expanded powers of the Federal Reserve. Economic turmoil. Nationalization of our the auto, bank and health care industries.

When you look at all the problems facing us today it almost seems surreal. It almost seems passé  to worry about the erosion of civil liberties due to the expansion of government power and control. Contrast this to the eight years of the Bush presidency when one couldn’t sneeze without someone arguing about how Bush is violating their rights. No one, it seems, is willing to face the reality: Obama, by and large, is carrying on with the exact same agenda, secrecy and expansion of government that his predecessor was. Hope and change has turned out to be nothing more than a marketing gimmick. A intentional disguise to hide the fact that he actually intends to build on what he inherited from President Bush. A cool ploy to hide the man behind the curtain: centralized banking and the power oligarchs.

And I don’t begrudge those haven’t caught up to this fact yet. But the facts are the facts. There will be no end to the war or terror, the war in Iraq or secret military tribunals. There will be no end to the Department of Homeland Security and the so-called Patriot Act. If anything we have seen the emboldenment and elevation of the Terror State since Obama took office. And, just like the patriots warned would happen, the DHS is now starting to label American’s as terrorists for simply supporting the Constitution, waving a Gadsen flag or re-affirming a strong political stance.

What we are facing is really a crises of responsibility. It really boils down to that.

Men, it is time to step up. If you love your life, if you love your country, it is time to step up.

I would like to suggest this: It doesn’t matter if a government program is doing good or bad, by simply existing it is a threat to our liberty and freedom. Decentralize and repeal must become the mantra of the patriot, the Christian, the freeman. We must demand a return to the principals our our forefathers: our rights end were another person’s begin. Taxation operates out of compulsion and force; it is the antithesis of freedom and liberty. We can not support federal government mandated programs where they exceed the 18 limited and enumerated powers of the Constitution, no matter the positive or negative effects to society.

Perhaps some of you are not the ‘political type’. I get that, I really do. But I would like to ask you this: at what point does this system become a problem? How many abuses will you allow to be assailed against you before you petition for redress? Where is your line in the sand?

Think about your home. Your land and home are taxed.  The loan you obtain the home with is taken from a bank owned by the Federal Reserve. The food you fill it with, regulated and controlled in it’s manufacture, marketing and content. The clothes you wear, subject to trade law and the health care you need should you become sick, nationalized. The car in your driveway, built by a company owned by the Federal Government. Your employer, regulated, controlled and taxed. At every aspect of our most basic right to life, liberty and property we find the usurpations and abuses promulgating every aspect of our being.

Consider what Frederic Bastiat wrote in ‘The Law’, 1850:

Each of us has a natural right—from God—to defend his person, his liberty, and his property.  These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two.  For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties?

Do you see where we are at? Do you see what is at hand? Put most simply: you have a moral obligation to fight against government encroachment into areas that exceed it’s lawful powers. We can no longer be happy with simply fighting for a smaller percentage of government growth, we must reduce the size, scope and authority of said government.

Decentralize and repeal. No longer a choice between two bad idea’s, but honest hope and change. The first step, of course, is for us to take responsibility for our own lives. So I guess the real question of the day is this: what are you doing to promote your own freedom and happiness? What battles are you fighting? Are you dependent on this system that operates on force to help you obtain what you need to survive? These are the questions we must ask.

Men, are we willing to fight this battle for posterity? History will record the result.

*Sigh*Virginia State Police: Assesing Potential Threats Of Violence  Note: This one is too large to upload, save a hard copy.