From: Bob Taft [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 8:53 PM
Subject: Senator Bunning tells why he is voting against confirmation of Fed
Chairman Bernanke 

 


The convention which framed the Constitution of the United States was
composed of fifty-five members. A majority were lawyers-not one farmer,
mechanic or laborer. Forty owned Revolutionary Scrip. Fourteen were land
speculators. Twenty-four were money-lenders. Eleven were merchants. Fifteen
were slave-holders. They made a Constitution to protect the rights of
property and not the rights of man,: Senator Richard Pettigrew- Triumphant
Plutocracy (1922) Nothing has changed except the bankers, the Pentagan and
Rupert Murduch run the show.The Foundations were rotten, and the good people
of America are paying the price.


 

Excellent point David.  This is what I keep trying constantly to get over,
that our High School government class has been brainwashing Americans for
two hundred years into thinking that the 1787 ConJob was a good thing.
Anyone who expounds upon the ConJob and has never read Lansing's unedited
notes http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=74897 knows
nothing of the actuality of the situation.  The super-secret ConCon was
called to take back control which had been won by the war for Independence.
The Bill of Rights was not voluntarilly added, but was an answer to the
demand on the part of many delegates that since all freedoms were being
surrendered to the new federation, that some must be returned as a condition
to signing the subversive document.  Still the ConCon could not muster the
signatures of two-thirds of the delegates, a figure it required for any
future amendment. Just as the Bill of Rights would NOT have been necessary
had not the 1787 Constitution been imposed upon the American people, Magna
Carta would NOT have been necessary had not the Norman bastard imposed the
Roman judicial system and the jewish money system upon the British people in
1066, negating the long-used earlier governmental system of Exodus 18:21.
http://www.freedomclubusa.com/the_tun

 


Best regards,.
Bob Taft
The Taft Ranch
Upton, Wyoming 
(307) 465-2447
"We hang  the petty thieves and appoint
the great ones to public office." Aesop 
http://www.freedomclubusa.com/the_tun
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=74897



On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 5:40 AM, david soori <[email protected]> wrote:



Perhaps the Magna Carte was not bad after all.Unfortunately the Brits are
being blinded by the Lisbon Treaty is going to loose it all.


                    =========

      =========
Video


Bunning Grills Bernanke, With Response


Permalink:
PIMPINTURTLE.COM/2009/12/04/bunning-grills-bernanke-with-response.aspx






 

Imagine, someone still in Congress that knows a criminal when he sees one.
Of course if Congress would stop authorizing fraud and irresponsibility in
the money and banking arena Wall Street might produce a more acceptable
class of individuals other than an endless stream of con artists, check
kiters, and outrfight thieves.

 

Interesting that Bernanke comes from the same place that spawned Woodrow
Wilson who signed the Federal Reserve scam, four years after William Howard
Taft proclaimed he would never do so.  I have long thought that Wilson's
later mental breakdown stemmed from his Fed treason.  May our current head
Shylock again follow in his footsteps.


Today's Dow Theory Letter by Richard Russell contained this item. It is so
refreshing to read...Imagine, someone in Congress speaking the plain
unvarnished truth!

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


The piece below is from a subscriber. It's long, but I thought it's so
important that I wanted my subscribers to be able to read it in full. In
this piece, an angry but courageous Senator Bunning tells why he is voting
against confirmation of Fed Chairman Bernanke for a second term.

Dear Richard:

I'm a populist who's undoubtedly to the left of most of your subscribers.
But today I found myself a conservative to love. Of course, he's retiring
next year. See what you think. (I put in bold some key passages in case you
want to just skim it.)


Senate Banking Committee 
Thursday, December 3, 2009

The Remarks of Sen. James Bunning (R-KY)

As Prepared For Delivery:

Four years ago when you came before the Senate for confirmation to be
Chairman of the Federal Reserve, I was the only Senator to vote against you.
In fact, I was the only Senator to even raise serious concerns about you. I
opposed you because I knew you would continue the legacy of Alan Greenspan,
and I was right. But I did not know how right I would be and could not begin
to imagine how wrong you would be in the following four years.

The Greenspan legacy on monetary policy was breaking from the Taylor Rule to
provide easy money, and thus inflate bubbles. Not only did you continue that
policy when you took control of the Fed, but you supported every Greenspan
rate decision when you were on the Fed earlier this decade. Sometimes you
even wanted to go further and provide even more easy money than Chairman
Greenspan. As recently as a letter you sent me two weeks ago, you still
refuse to admit Fed actions played any role in inflating the housing bubble
despite overwhelming evidence and the consensus of economists to the
contrary. And in your efforts to keep filling the punch bowl, you cranked up
the printing press to buy mortgage securities, Treasury securities,
commercial paper, and other assets from Wall Street. Those purchases, by the
way, led to some nice profits for the Wall Street banks and dealers who sold
them to you, and the G.S.E. purchases seem to be illegal since the Federal
Reserve Act only allows the purchase of securities backed by the government.

On consumer protection, the Greenspan policy was don't do it. You went along
with his policy before you were Chairman, and continued it after you were
promoted. The most glaring example is it took you two years to finally
regulate subprime mortgages after Chairman Greenspan did nothing for 12
years. Even then, you only acted after pressure from Congress and after it
was clear subprime mortgages were at the heart of the economic meltdown. On
other consumer protection issues you only acted as the time approached for
your re-nomination to be Fed Chairman.

Alan Greenspan refused to look for bubbles or try to do anything other than
create them. Likewise, it is clear from your statements over the last four
years that you failed to spot the housing bubble despite many warnings.
Chairman Greenspan's attitude toward regulating banks was much like his
attitude toward consumer protection. Instead of close supervision of the
biggest and most dangerous banks, he ignored the growing balance sheets and
increasing risk. You did no better. In fact, under your watch every one of
the major banks failed or would have failed if you did not bail them out.

On derivatives, Chairman Greenspan and other Clinton Administration
officials attacked Brooksley Born when she dared to raise concerns about the
growing risks. They succeeded in changing the law to prevent her or anyone
else from effectively regulating derivatives. After taking over the Fed, you
did not see any need for more substantial regulation of derivatives until it
was clear that we were headed to a financial meltdown thanks in part to
those products.

The Greenspan policy on transparency was talk a lot, use plenty of numbers,
but say nothing. Things were so bad one TV network even tried to guess his
thoughts by looking at the briefcase he carried to work. You promised
Congress more transparency when you came to the job, and you promised us
more transparency when you came begging for TARP. To be fair, you have
published some more information than before, but those efforts are
inadequate and you still refuse to provide details on the Fed's bailouts
last year and on all the toxic waste you have bought.

And Chairman Greenspan sold the Fed's independence to Wall Street through
the so-called "Greenspan Put". Whenever Wall Street needed a boost, Alan was
there. But you went far beyond that when you bowed to the political
pressures of the Bush and Obama administrations and turned the Fed into an
arm of the Treasury. Under your watch, the Bernanke Put became a bailout for
all large financial institutions, including many foreign banks. And you put
the printing presses into overdrive to fund the government's spending and
hand out cheap money to your masters on Wall Street, which they use to rake
in record profits while ordinary Americans and small businesses can't even
get loans for their everyday needs.

Now, I want to read you a quote: "I believe that the tools available to the
banking agencies, including the ability to require adequate capital and an
effective bank receivership process are sufficient to allow the agencies to
minimize the systemic risks associated with large banks. Moreover, the
agencies have made clear that no bank is too-big-too-fail, so that bank
management, shareholders, and un-insured debt holders understand that they
will not escape the consequences of excessive risk-taking. In short,
although vigilance is necessary, I believe the systemic risk inherent in the
banking system is well-managed and well-controlled."

That should sound familiar, since it was part of your response to a question
I asked about the systemic risk of large financial institutions at your last
confirmation hearing. I'm going to ask that the full question and answer be
included in today's hearing record.

Now, if that statement was true and you had acted according to it, I might
be supporting your nomination today. But since then, you have decided that
just about every large bank, investment bank, insurance company, and even
some industrial companies are too big to fail. Rather than making
management, shareholders, and debt holders feel the consequences of their
risk-taking, you bailed them out. In short, you are the definition of moral
hazard.

Instead of taking that money and lending to consumers and cleaning up their
balance sheets, the banks started to pocket record profits and pay out
billions of dollars in bonuses. Because you bowed to pressure from the banks
and refused to resolve them or force them to clean up their balance sheets
and clean out the management, you have created zombie banks that are only
enriching their traders and executives. You are repeating the mistakes of
Japan in the 1990s on a much larger scale, while sowing the seeds for the
next bubble. In the same letter where you refused to admit any
responsibility for inflating the housing bubble, you also admitted that you
do not have an exit strategy for all the money you have printed and
securities you have bought. That sounds to me like you intend to keep
propping up the banks for as long as they want.

Even if all that were not true, the A.I.G. bailout alone is reason enough to
send you back to Princeton. First, you told us A.I.G. and its creditors had
to be bailed out because they posed a systemic risk, largely because of
their credit default swaps portfolio. Those credit default swaps, by the
way, are the same over-the-counter derivatives that the Fed did not want
regulated. Well, according to the TARP Inspector General, it turns out the
Fed was not concerned about the financial condition of the credit default
swaps partners when you decided to pay them off at par. In fact, the
Inspector General makes it clear that no serious efforts were made to get
the partners to take haircuts at all, and one bank's offer to take a haircut
was actually declined. I can only think of two possible reasons you would
not make then-New York Fed President Geithner try to save the taxpayers some
money by seriously negotiating or at least take up U.B.S. on their offer of
a haircut. Sadly, those two reasons are incompetence or a desire to secretly
funnel more money to a few select firms, most notably Goldman Sachs, Merrill
Lynch, and a handful of large European banks. I also cannot understand why
you did not seek European government contributions to this bailout of their
banking system.

>From monetary policy to regulation, consumer protection, transparency, and
independence, your time as Fed Chairman has been a failure. You stated time
and again during the housing bubble that there was no bubble. After the
bubble burst, you repeatedly claimed the fallout would be small. And you
clearly did not spot the systemic risks that you claim the Fed was supposed
to be looking out for. Where I come from we punish failure, not reward it.
That is certainly the way it was when I played baseball, and the way it is
all across America. Judging by the current Treasury Secretary, some may
think Washington does reward failure, but that should not be the case. I
will do everything I can to stop your nomination and drag out the process as
long as possible. We must put an end to your and the Fed's failures, and
there is no better time than now.
.....................................................................

Guess who's become arguably the nation's leading advocate for Constitutional
money? Why it's none other than my old friend, James Grant, publisher of the
Interest Rate Observer. In a great two-page piece in Saturday's Wall Street
Journal entitled "Requiem for the Dollar," Jim concludes "Being alive,we can
begin to set things right. The thing to do, I say is to restore the nets to
the tennis courts of money and finance. Collateralize the dollar -- make it
exchangeable into something of genuine value. Get the Fed out of the
price-fixing business. Replace Ben Bernanke with a latter-day Thomson
Hanley. Find-- cultivate -- battalions of latter-day Hellmans and set them
to running free-market banks. 

 
<http://ww2.dowtheoryletters.com/MembersOnline.nsf/PrintView+Richard%27s+Rem
arks/$First?OpenDocument> .




-- 
Best regards,.
Bob Taft
The Taft Ranch
Upton, Wyoming 
(307) 465-2447
"We hang  the petty thieves and appoint
the great ones to public office." Aesop 
http://www.freedomclubusa.com/the_tun
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=74897

 





-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"total_truth_sciences" group.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences

Reply via email to