The Non-Electability Of Rick Santorum

By Paul Zummo

It has become accepted as a matter of fact in some circles that Rick Santorum is completely unelectable in a general election. He is so outside the mainstream that Barack Obama would simply wipe the floor with him. I’ve even seen it asserted by more than one commenter than Santorum wouldn’t even match Walter Mondale’s electoral vote total.

The more extreme claim is patently ludicrous to anyone even remotely familiar with America’s political landscape. I would suggest that, at a minimum, no Republican candidate can lose the following states in the upcoming presidential election: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Utah. I’ve left out states like Alaska and West Virginia that I think are longshots for Obama as well. That’s not exactly Mondale territory – that’s not even Dukakis bad.

Fine, you say, Santorum won’t lose every state. He still can’t hold the line in swing states like Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Missouri and others. He is just too extreme for these states.

Really? So the guy who won statewide election in a leaning-Democratic swing state twice has no shot in leaning-Republican swing states? Yes, I know that Santorum lost by 18 points the last time he ran in Pennsylvania, and that should not be so casually dismissed. But he did win twice, and he ran as a conservative no different from the man he is now.

As for Santorum’s 18 point loss – yes, it is bad and it looks strange that someone who lost by such a large amount in his last election could possibly win the presidency. I would just note that in November 2006 Mitt Romney’s approval rating in the state of Massachusetts stood at 34 percent. The only reason he was not shellacked in his re-election effort is because he didn’t even attempt to run again.

Just saying.

Bill Of Rights

We all need to remember our rights and determine to teach others about them before we loose our rights completely.

More Attacks On Ron Paul And His Supporters

Gingrich Labels Ron Paul’s Entire Support Base As “People Who Want To Legalize Drugs”

Ron Paul presidential campaignThe allegation is clear, Newt Gingrich’s latest assertion that Ron Paul’s “volunteer base is people who want to legalize drugs” is designed to create the impression that anyone who votes for Paul is at best socially irresponsible or at worst a crack addled junkie.

The former speaker of the House made the remarks in an interview with conservative commentator John McCaslin yesterday, also taking a swipe at Paul over his foreign policy outlook.
“This is a guy who basically says, if the United States were only nice, it wouldn’t have had 9/11.” Gingrich stated, boiling down an extremely complex issue into a meaningless snipe.

“He doesn’t want to blame the bad guys. … He dismisses the danger of Iranian nuclear weapon and seems to be indifferent to the idea that Israel could be wiped out.” Gingrich added.

Anyone who has spent more than five minutes researching Ron Paul’s stance on foreign policy, and 9/11 in particular, knows that Paul subscribes to the ‘blowback’ theory put forth by multiple experts, former US intelligence officials and validated by Osama Bin Laden himself, that the US is viewed as a legitimate target because it has engaged in military occupation and preemptive war in the middle east and beyond for decades.


Furthermore, the US has also aggressively supported the Israeli military machine and the suppression of the Palestinian people. These complex issues spearhead Ron Paul’s outlook on foreign policy, while Gingrich and the rest of the GOP candidates espouse the ridiculously myopic notion that ‘terrorists hate our freedom so they attack us’. As regards Israel being “wiped out” by Iran, Gingrich obviously hasn’t factored in the country’s arsenal of hundreds of nuclear weapons and the fact that US intelligence admits there is little evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program even existing – points that Ron Paul has consistently raised in the debates.

To suggest Paul is “indifferent” to this issue is farcical.
It is the drugs remark, however, that has irked many Paul supporters the most.
As a Libertarian and a staunch critic of the federal government’s so called “war on drugs”, Ron Paul has made it clear that as president he would open up dialogue on the issue of drug legalization as a means of effectively undermining the black market, overturning racial injustice, reducing ballooning prison populations and opening up possibilities where medical use of currently illegal drugs are concerned.
Gingrich is not stupid and knows full well that these are legitimate issues, yet he has chosen to turn to negative stereotyping in an attempt to stave off his plummeting poll numbers and dwindling support in the face of Ron Paul’s recent emergence as front runner in Iowa.

The truth is that Paul is leading in the polls precisely because he treats complex political and social issues in a fashion befitting them, rather than boiling everything down into sound bites and oversimplified rhetoric, purely for the purposes of political point scoring. Paul’s message of limited government and enhanced liberties also resonates with an American public sick and tired of the overreach of the Washington political establishment.

The Congressman has also organized a rock solid caucus campaign in the early voting states.
In visits to Iowa this week, Paul has drawn large numbers of diverse voters, young and old. A recent CNN / ORC poll highlighted the fact that Paul is the only GOP candidate that appeals to voters across the political spectrum.

In a direct head to head with Obama, Paul fared significantly better than all of his GOP rivals in a wide and diverse range of population categories, including males; persons ages 18 to 34; persons under 50 years of age; persons earning less than $50k per year; persons who have attended college; crossover Democrats; self-identified liberals; self-described moderates; residents of the Northeast and Midwest geographic regions; and those residing in urban areas.

According to the poll, Paul attracts more independents than Obama by 48 to 47 percent. The Congressman also betters Obama 51 to 46 percent among white voters and betters the incumbent president 52 to 44 percent among voters residing in rural areas.

Paul also betters all the other GOP competitors against Obama where non-white voters are concerned, attracting the support of one in four non-white adults.
Yet, if Newt Gingrich is to be believed, the vast majority of these people are concerned not with the state of the nation, but purely with what drugs they would be able to get their hands on under a Paul presidency.

According to Newt Gingrich, Paul’s support base, such as those pictured here at events in Iowa this week, are purely concerned with legalizing narcotics.
Paul’s principles are steadfast and, unlike Gingrich, his message is unfaltering.
The Congressman has exposed Gingrich’s “serial hypocrisy”over the past two months in ad spots, and drawn on the fact that Gingrich effectively used his position as House Speaker to line his coffers with lobbyist money.

Gingrich’s hypocrisy seems to know no bounds, given that last week he was urging candidates not to negatively attack each other and this week he is doing just that.
In response to Gingrich’s attack on his supporters, Paul reiterated the former Speaker’s flip flopping nature in an interview with CBS.

——————————————————————
Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.
Sponsored Link: How much do you REALLY need to retire? A former eye surgeon says you can actually retire on just $10,000. See his radical plan in full detail, here.

2012 Politics

2012 Politics, Part 2 - David...

Predictions for 2012 Presidential Politics

I am setting the stage by making these early predictions for the next presidential election in 2012. For anyone who would dare to dispute my assertions, please send me a quarter once my predictions become real and I am vindicated. It's all about Hillary by default!

It's sometimes between May and July 2012. Campaigning is at full swing. There are speculation all over about this and that.The President of the United States, Barack Obama isseeking a second term in office, however; the rumor mill is swinging. Rumors leaked directly from the Vice President Joe Biden's office intended to test the reaction of the American People.

Rumors that the Vice Presidentof the United States is withdrawing his name from further consideration on the ticket which, according to the experts; is certain to win re-election in a landslide against the party of "NO".

How can this be? What is the problem or what could be the problem? The economy is sound. Banks are doing well by lending and financing small businesses again.Wall Street is on a streak of sound investments and investors are dancing in the street. War - what war? The Nation has moved on from the debacle of 2000-2008 and prosperity is in the land.The Taliban has surrendered and the remnants were driven out of Afghanistan by locals. Iran has recognized the right of the Israelis to live in perfect harmony with their neighbors and ambassadors were exchanged between North Korea and South Korea. Cuba is no longer a pariah. Blacks are getting along with Whites and all things being equal, Whites are reciprocating and extending an olive branch to our amigos from South of the Border. It's time to get along. The Barackometer is now at its highest point.


Amidstall this, why is Vice President Biden not in the race for re-election? The last time, perhaps the only time in U.S history a sitting Vice President refused to run, it was because he and his under-study president had destroyed the goodwill towards all men and took peace for granted. So, the heir apparent to the throne in 2008could not bring himself to running for the same land he had pillaged for 8 years.No, he couldnt face over 300 million Americans and ask for another four years of rubbish-filled leadership. He disappeared to his usual undisclosed location. Now, Vice President Biden is bowing out. This is an oxy. It should not happen this way.He must be excited to run on the records of Obama-Biden for the next four years. Vice President Biden must be mistaken!

While accepting Mr. Biden's resignation, the President responded with praise and understanding of his desire to withdraw from the upcoming election.President Obama in his speech informed the nation that he accepted Mr. Biden's withdrawal withgreat understanding and expressed his thanks and gratitude for a magnificent four years.To the chagrined of those present, the President never took a single question from reportersbutoffered another news conference in the next few days. A week later, at a weekly briefing, the president appears unannouncedinside the Rose Garden to nominate the Nations New Vice President. Any surprise here? Ladies and Gentlemen, it is with great excitement that I nominate Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton as my Vice President for upcoming electionTo Be Continued


What Spending Cuts

If you missed Tuesday night's debate on CNN, there's something you need to know. All seven of my opponents stood up on stage and applauded Big Government - asked for more of it, in fact.

So your choice is clear.

With just over five weeks left until voters begin going to the polls, if you want a President who will FIGHT for less government and lower spending, then I must ask for your support right away.

You see, Newt Gingrich - who previously warned of the dangers of the Patriot Act - now wants it expanded. He wants amnesty, too - to keep American citizens footing the bill for government services for illegal immigrants.

The others were falling all over themselves to launch more undeclared TRILLION-dollar wars on Iran, or perhaps Pakistan, or maybe even Syria. Of course, they all want more military spending, even though we're already spending almost one TRILLION dollars per year - an amount nearly equal to what the entire rest of the world spends!

But that certainly hasn't stopped the chicken-little stories from my opponents about supposed 'defense cuts'! Even Mitt Romney tried to pull the wool over our eyes. I set him straight. NOTHING is being cut in Washington. PERIOD. Believe me, I've tried! All Congress is arguing about is how much to increase spending.

But when hundreds of billions of dollars just aren't enough for my opponents' favorite agencies, their answer is to howl in pain. Isn't this the game the liberals play? I guess we've learned to expect as much over the years from them. But isn't it downright disgusting when Republican candidates for President stoop to that level?

After all, we're over $15 TRILLION in debt. When are my opponents going to get serious?

Unfortunately, that's exactly what's lacking in these debates so far - seriousness.

And that's why the establishment of BOTH parties is so scared of me. You see, they know I am serious about balancing the budget in three years. They know I will cut ONE TRILLION in spending my first year. And they know NONE of their sacred cows are safe.

If we don't need it or can't afford it, it doesn't matter what department of government we're talking about. Sure, the establishment will scream and holler that we need MORE money to keep our country safe. But the simple fact is, if we had a constitutional foreign policy - and if we stopped nation-building and policing the world - our nation would be much safer and spend much LESS money at the same time. Our troops understand that fact. That's why I've received more money from members of the military than all of my Republican opponents COMBINED.

But sadly, my establishment opponents just don't seem to get it. They want more spending, more government, and more debt. You and I both know we can't afford politics as usual any longer. You and I both know maintaining the big spending, Big Government status quo will only lead to our nation's ruin.

But I'm the ONE candidate who is serious about fixing our problems.

I'm the ONE candidate who will change our foreign policy to strengthen our national defense while ending these wars.

I'm the ONE candidate who will fight to end welfare to illegal immigrants AND secure our border.

And I'm the ONE candidate who will take power BACK from government, not scream to give more to it.

But I must be able to count on your generous financial support if I'm going to win the Republican nomination. My campaign is in crunch time right now.

As I mentioned, it's just over five weeks until voters start going to the caucuses and polls to begin selecting the next Republican nominee for President.

In these final weeks, my campaign is launching an all-out voter contact blitz with TV ads, direct mail, and boots on the ground in both Iowa and New Hampshire. With polls showing me statistically tied for first in Iowa and clearly in second in New Hampshire, you and I must make our big push right now.

So please make your most generous contribution TODAY to my campaign.

Whatever you can give, I'll put to IMMEDIATE use getting my message of liberty to the voters.

We're so close. I believe the time is right, and you and I have the message to win.

So please make your most generous contribution TODAY!

Together, we can Restore America Now!

For Liberty, Ron Paul

P.S. Every one of my opponents during Tuesday night's debate was demanding more government. Some are even falsely claiming military spending is being cut! But the only thing being debated in Washington, D.C. right now is how fast spending will increase! I'm the only candidate in this race who is serious about cutting spending. And if we don't need it or can't afford it, it doesn't matter what department it's in. But with just over five weeks left until voters begin going to the polls, I must be able to count on your financial support if I'm going to win the Republican nomination for President. So please contribute whatever you are able TODAY! Paid for by Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign Committee www.ronpaul2012.com

I got this article from harrolds.blogspot.com. Obviously, the article itself is from Ron Paul, but I wanted to give credit to Harrold for finding it and posting it. Check out his blogspot if you have a chance. It's incredibly busy, but the information is spot on.

Tags:

Obama’s Agenda: Overwhelm The System

socialist agenda in americaRahm Emanuel cynically said, "You never want a crisis to go to waste." It is now becoming clear that the crisis he was referring to is Barack Obama's presidency.

Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. To the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows exactly what he's doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos -- thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within.Â

Barack Obama is my college classmate (Columbia University, class of '83). As Glenn Beck correctly predicted from day one, Obama is following the plan of Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbia University. They outlined a plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system with government spending and entitlement demands. Add up the clues below. Taken individually they're alarming. Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn the United States into a socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority that desperately needs government for survival ... and can be counted on to always vote for bigger government. Why not? They have no responsibility to pay for it.

-- Universal health care. The health care bill had very little to do with health care. It had everything to do with unionizing millions of hospital and health care workers, as well as adding 15,000 to 20,000 new IRS agents (who will join government employee unions). Obama doesn't care that giving free health care to 30 million Americans will add trillions to the national debt. What he does care about is that it cements the dependence of those 30 million voters to Democrats and big government. Who but a socialist revolutionary would pass this reckless spending bill in the middle of a depression?

-- Cap and trade. Like health care legislation having nothing to do with health care, cap and trade has nothing to do with global warming. It has everything to do with redistribution of income, government control of the economy and a criminal payoff to Obama's biggest contributors. Those powerful and wealthy unions and contributors (like GE, which owns NBC, MSNBC and CNBC) can then be counted on to support everything Obama wants. They will kick-back hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions to Obama and the Democratic Party to keep them in power. The bonus is that all the new taxes on Americans with bigger cars, bigger homes and businesses helps Obama "spread the wealth around."

-- Make Puerto Rico a state. Why? Who's asking for a 51st state? Who's asking for millions of new welfare recipients and government entitlement addicts in the middle of a depression? Certainly not American taxpayers. But this has been Obama's plan all along. His goal is to add two new Democrat senators, five Democrat congressman and a million loyal Democratic voters who are dependent on big government.

-- Legalize 12 million illegal immigrants. Just giving these 12 million potential new citizens free health care alone could overwhelm the system and bankrupt America. But it adds 12 million reliable new Democrat voters who can be counted on to support big government. Add another few trillion dollars in welfare, aid to dependent children, food stamps, free medical, education, tax credits for the poor, and eventually Social Security.

-- Stimulus and bailouts. Where did all that money go? It went to Democrat contributors, organizations (ACORN), and unions -- including billions of dollars to save or create jobs of government employees across the country. It went to save GM and Chrysler so that their employees could keep paying union dues. It went to AIG so that Goldman Sachs could be bailed out (after giving Obama almost $1 million in contributions). A staggering $125 billion went to teachers (thereby protecting their union dues). All those public employees will vote loyally Democrat to protect their bloated salaries and pensions that are bankrupting America. The country goes broke, future generations face a bleak future, but Obama, the Democrat Party, government, and the unions grow more powerful. The ends justify the means.

-- Raise taxes on small business owners, high-income earners, and job creators. Put the entire burden on only the top 20 percent of taxpayers, redistribute the income, punish success, and reward those who did nothing to deserve it (except vote for Obama). Reagan wanted to dramatically cut taxes in order to starve the government. Obama wants to dramatically raise taxes to starve his political opposition.

With the acts outlined above, Obama and his regime have created a vast and rapidly expanding constituency of voters dependent on big government; a vast privileged class of public employees who work for big government; and a government dedicated to destroying capitalism and installing themselves as socialist rulers by overwhelming the system.

Add it up and you've got the perfect Marxist scheme -- all devised by my Columbia University college classmate Barack Obama.

Wayne Allyn Root was the 2008 Libertarian Party vice presidential nominee and serves on the Libertarian National Committee.

 

Orignial Article appears here: http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/obama-s-agenda--overwhelm-the-system-95716764.html

Ron Paul

Ron Paul

Ron Paul vs. Patrick Henry -- A Critique Of "The Revolution"

Ron Paul is by far the most stalwart member of the U.S. Congress and a true American hero.

As stated on the dust cover of his book, "The Revolution" (Grand Central Publishing, 2008), Ron Paul "is the leading advocate of freedom in our nation's capital." Ron Paul never votes against the Constitution and has earned the nickname, "Dr. No".

<b>Ron Paul Fails<br>

To Grasp The Threat</b>

Nonetheless, Congressman Ron Paul has failed to grasp the threat to liberty posed by the United States Constitution. In fact, he holds the belief that the Constitution is the bulwark of American liberty.

Ron Paul states that "Americans must remember that the Constitution was designed to limit the federal government's overall scope. Article I, Section 8, lists the powers of Congress" (p44). This oft-repeated statement is very naive, when we consider the sweeping powers enumerated in this section.

The states were left virtually naked before the monolith of federal power. As Patrick Henry warned, "the powers of both sword and purse are granted to Congress, which is an open invitation to tyranny."


Dr. Paul concludes "The limitations the Constitution placed on the federal government had to be taken seriously if we expected to maintain a free society" (p45). As Patrick Henry so plaintively inquired, "what limitations?"

"Patrick Henry raised precisely this concernin Virginia: wasn't 'general welfare' a dangerously open-ended phrase that would permit the federal government to do whatever it wanted, since government officials could blandly claim that all its measures were intended to promote the general welfare?"

<b>Abuse of Power</b>

Ron Paul goes on to argue that the Constitution's power to raise armies is innocuous. "The power to raise armies is not a power to force people into the army," (p57).

But Patrick Henry clearly foresaw and warned of the danger in the Virginia Ratifying Convention on June 16, 1788. "To me this appears to be a very alarming power, when unlimited (power of raising armies). This unlimited authority is a most dangerous power: its principles are despotic. It is a government of force, and the genius of despotism expressly."

What Ron Paul fails to realize is that the Constitution was dead on arrival in 1787, completely unable to protect us from tyranny from its inception.

Finally, Ron Paul issues this call to action. "It is not too late to rally and recall our people to the constitution, the rule of law, and our traditional American republic" (p67). Notice the totally secular nature of this appeal.

There is no call to repentance before God. Rather there is the futile call to return to the very document by which America rejected government under God.

<b>For More Information</b>


Tags:


The Internet We Know And Love Is At Risk. Help Save It.

Right now, the U.S. Congress is considering legislation that could profoundly affect the future of the internet. It's called the Stop Online Piracy Act.

The fact is that this legislation as written won't stop piracy. But it would pose a serious threat to social media and user generated content sites (like YouTube) across the internet. It could also undermine some of the core technical systems underlying the internet, creating new cybersecurity risks.

As a non-profit committed to keeping the web open and accessible to all, Mozilla wants to ensure that this legislation does not jeopardize the foundational structure of the Internet.

So we've done two things so far:

1) Earlier this week, we wrote a joint letter with Facebook, Google, Twitter, eBay, Yahoo! and other technology companies publicly opposing this legislation -- and placed ads in various influential newspapers across the country.

2) We also joined other organizations in a day of action on November 16th -- when hearings were being held in the U.S. House -- to draw attention to the issue and get people to contact their representatives.

But these are only the first steps toward ensuring that the proposed legislation does not pass as currently written.

If you'd like to get involved, please sign up using the form on the right. We'll be in touch with ways to help in this campaign along with our other efforts to defend and improve the Web.

If you are not in the U.S., please pass this page along to anyone you know in the States -- and I'd encourage you to sign up anyway, to stay informed about what we're up to.

Go here to get involved

Ron Paul’s Greatest Interview

Ron Paul is one of the only politicians that has been around a long time and is still true to his beliefs. He's never wavered and doesn't seem to care if his convictions are popular or politically correct.

Agree or disagree, you have to admire the man. He's one of the most sincere politicians that has ever graced Washington DC.

PICKET: New Book Shows How Soros Set Up And Financially Benefited From ’09 Stimulus

Peter Schweizer, a Hoover Institution fellow, explores in his new book, "Throw Them All Out" how Capitol Hill lawmakers financially benefit from their own legislation and manage to sidestep insider information laws. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is under fire for allegedly buying $1 million to $5 million of Visa stock during the credit card company's initial public offering (IPO) phase and later blocked credit card legislation reform two years later. As a result, her investment took off 203 percent. Big Government's Wynton Hall writes:

Despite Pelosi’s consistent railing against credit card companies, on March 18, 2008, the Pelosis bought between $1 million and $5 million (politicians do not have to report the exact amounts, only ranges) worth of Visa stock at the IPO price of $44 per share. Two days later, the stock price rocketed to $65 per share, yielding a 50% profit. The Pelosis then bought Visa twice more. By their third purchase on June 4, 2008, Visa was worth $85 per share.

How did Nancy Pelosi snag one of the most coveted initial public offerings in history? The facts are still emerging. Yet according to Schweizer, corporations that wish to build congressional allies will sometimes hand-pick members of Congress to receive IPOs. Pelosi received her Visa IPO almost two weeks after a potentially damaging piece of legislation for Visa, the Credit Card Fair Fee Act, had been introduced in the House.

If passed, the bill would have cut into Visa’s profits substantially by lowering so-called “interchange fees,” the 1% to 3% charge retailers pay Visa when customers use Visa cards for purchases. Interchange fees are a critical source of revenue for the four credit card companies–$48 billion in 2008, to be exact.If the Credit Card Fair Fee Act had been passed into effect, it would have amended antitrust laws to require credit card companies to enter negotiations with merchants over interchange fees, and it would have given the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission the power to arbitrate if the two sides failed to come to an agreement. For that reason, Visa and the other credit card companies strongly opposed the bill.

It is not just the lawmakers on Capitol Hill who can make a killing. Their rich and powerful cronies can also financially benefit from intel they receive from Washington D.C. politicians. According to Schweizer's book, George Soros made his way into the Obama White House by becoming one of candidate Obama's "first big catches."

Mr. Soros donated more than $60,000 to Obama's 2004 Senate campaign and helped build the Obama 2008 war chest substantially. Soros gained amazing access to the president and the president's economic agenda immediately after the 2008 election, according to Schweizer, who writes in his book:

"Days after President Obama was elected, Soros was helping to set the agenda. Soros had regular meetings with senior White House officials. He met with Obama’s top economist, Larry Summers,on February 25, 2009. He also had meetings in the Old Executive Office Building with senior officials on March 24 and 25 asthe stimulus was being forged. He was later involved in private discussions concerning widespread financial reform."

"Soros was also a financial backer of the Center for American Progress, which functioned as Obama’s think tank. John Podesta,who headed CAP, was Obama’s transition director. Several CAP policy ideas became part of Obama’s agenda. Soros said at the time, 'I think we need a large stimulus package, which will provide funds for state and local government to maintain their budgets, because they are not allowed by the constitution to run a deficit. For such a program to be successful, the federal government would need to provide hundreds of billions of dollars. In addition, another infrastructure program is necessary. In total, the cost would be in the 300 to 600 billion dollar range.'”

Schweizer found that after "tens of billions" of tax payer dollars were invested in the Democrat backed 2009 stimulus package, in the first quarter of 2009, Soros made a financial windfall by investing in stimulus winners like: Hologic, a maker of diagnostic equipment, which gained from federal funding of medical systems, Emulex, a government contractor that designs fiber channels and software products, and EMC, a data storage company.

I spoke with Schweizer on Sunday night about his book and asked about how the rich and powerful can legally obtain insider information from insider Capitol Hill activity and financially benefit.

Schweizer calls the scheme that Steve Eisman, Warren Buffett, and Soros use the "Baptist and bootlegger strategy."

"What a lot of these guys do like Buffett and Soros or Eisman, in the case of for-profit education, is present themselves as reformers. They present these grand ideas and they're sort of statesman who are just interested in improving the situation in our country, but the reality is, as I point out in the book, at the same time, they're often aggressively trading stocks," Schweizer said.

As I have covered in previous Water Cooler posts, Steve Eisman, a New York hedge fund manager, was brought forth to Capitol Hill to testify before Senator Tom Harkin’s Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee to support the Department of Education's Gainful Employment (GOE) rule.

Supporters of the GOE rule and of Eisman will say he was needed at the hearings, because Eisman provided valuable warnings and insight about the mortgage crisis. Many said Mr. Eisman was only trying to help the country stave off another financial crisis that would stem from the student loan defaults in the for profit school industry.

His participation in the hearings have been severely questioned, though, as the education regulation would financially cripple for profit schools. Evidence that the D.C. based organization CREW found showed that Mr. Eisman was short-selling for-profit schools.

If these schools failed he would financially profit. Congressman Darrell Issa, California Republican, and Senator Mike Enzi, Wyoming Republican, urged the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) to probe into whether or not there were any laws broken, but the SEC has yet to act.

"The Senate confirms the SEC commissioner and they set the budgets for the SEC," says Schweizer who thinks the model of having the SEC investigate such matters is unworkable.

"Warren Buffett, for example during the financial crisis, helped establish the public-private partnership and at the same time, that was going to bail out banks and he helped design it. As he was doing it, he was buying billions of shares in bank stocks," Schweizer added.

Schweizer also explained that Buffett financially profited off the bank stock investments, and it was completely legal, "because for some reason if you do this with government money or with government institutions it's okay. But were he to do that in a scenario with a merger taking place, he would face insider trading laws."

Article Source: Kerry Picket
Kerry Picket is the Editor/Blogger of the The Water Cooler, responsible for audio and visual editorial-commentary content and interfacing with the Web. A graduate of Denison University, she was at the Media Research Center as an associate producer for the video-sharing site Eyeblast.tv and a blogger for Newsbusters.org.

Before that, she produced news content for Robin Quivers of "The Howard Stern Show" on Sirius satellite radio, wrote copy for MTV Radio, and worked as a production assistant at MTV.com.

original article http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/nov/14/picket-new-book-shows-how-soros-set-and-financiall/

© Constitution Party
Developed by Amore | Your Privacy