A Study in Occam's Razor

Will you eat at McDonald's after this?

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:17:15 -0600

Came across this astounding video while doing some research on better nutrition. Does it really surprise anyone that a McDonald's cheeseburger and fries don't grow mold or deteriorate after 4 years. Keep in mind these items are not shrink wrapped, or in any way preserved.

What in the world is McD's doing to the food that it basically is self preserved? I think perhaps its the fat and oil they cook this food in, it somehow preserves the food, in that the oil gets so hot it changes chemically, becoming more plastic like.

Sadly, we stuff this down the throats of our kids because we love the convenience and price. We are as much to blame for our children being obese as the Multi-National Corporations that make this crap.

I think McD's should change the name to "The Everlasting Happy Meal".

Why no entries?

Thu, 4 Mar 2010 17:26:30 -0600

Don't be alarmed, me and the team are considering some changes and dealing with other business. May the sun shine on our free land once again.

Are Illinoisans Really so Stupid?

Mon, 15 Feb 2010 02:47:28 -0600

I have not written since that fateful day, February 2, 2010. Needless to say I'm quite disappointed with the Conservative voters of Illinois.

I expected the hegomonising swarm, otherwise known as the Main Stream Media, to support Kirk. They made their choices clear back in December when they chose both the Democratic and the Republican candidates, which simply told me that a vote for one or a vote for the other was as good as a vote for the New World Order headed up by the hegemonic tribe.

What I didn't expect was that Illinois voters would succomb to political narcolepsy when it came to possibly sending real change to Washington, a distinct and unmistakable message to Congress that murderous, conniving traitors like Mark Kirk are not welcome in American politics.

I'm left wondering why Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck or any of the other conservative pundits would totally ignore Kirk's horrific record or not make a stand against him as they did Scozzafava, and in some instances even kinda, sorta endorsed him.

So, all you cud munchers in Illinois, Do you really want Mark Kirk to be your US Senator? Did you read none of the 15 reports I did in the 15 days prior to the primary?

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 1 - Illinois Primary Election Day

Tue, 2 Feb 2010 12:05:15 -0600

Today is the day we the citizens can un-elect Mark Kirk. Over the last 15 days I've written about Mark's corporate interests, PAC monies, How he traded a YES vote for Cap and Trade for money from a company that belongs to a climate exchange, his murder of civilians in a foreign country while an intelligence agent of the US, his drug smuggling in same said job and his trafficing in the sex slave industry also.

You can find this information and more at the links below.

Day 15: Introduction to Mark Kirk; a 15 day expose.

Day 14: Kirk's Campaign finances

Day 13: Kirk the CIA Asset and Supplemental

Day 12: Endorsements for Kirk

Day 11: Lobby, PAC and Special Interest Monies in Kirk's Pockets

Day 10: Gun Control

Day 9: Kirk's Congressional Voting Record

Day 8: Kirk's Earmarks

Day 7: Public Sentiment

Day 6: Kirk's Lack of Debate Appearances / Hates Disabled Persons

Day 5: Invasion of Privacy

Day 4: Kirk as a Social Moderate - Anti-family - Pro-Infant-Murder

Day 3: Cap and Trade Traitor - Climate Change Charlatan

Day 2: Net Neutrality

Day 1: 2010 Primary Election Day

If ever a man deserved the most that the long arm of the law could give him, Mark Kirk is that man. Instead Kirk's powerful friends have protected him, put him in elected offices, with the power to make important and life changing decisions that affect all of us.

We have to ask ourselves what Mark Kirk will get from all his powerful friends and monied contributors when he leaves office. Will the reward him for voting in their favor?

Please consider these points from Oath Keepers when voting for a candidate for public office.

It's time for this kind of politician to be removed from office. Please join me at the ballot box today voting against Mark Kirk for US Senator from Illinois

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 2 - Net Neutrality

Mon, 1 Feb 2010 22:48:23 -0600

I grew up in the time when 'hack the planet' was the defacto state of being on the internet, which at that time consisted of DARPAnet or BBS's. If you were half decent at programming, chances were you could access just about anything on the inet that existed 30+ years ago. The internet has come a long way, integrating itself into our business and personal lives in ways we barely imagined, let alone thought possible back then.

Who would have thought that people 30 years later would be using twitter to let the world know about the religious fascism that exists in Iran during the election protests. Who would have thought that 20 to 30 percent of one's business sales could be generated by online sales or entire business models built on the backbone of the internet like World of Warcraft, the massive online multiplayer game. Who would have thought that people would be finding their soul mates online or exchanging mission critical business information across state lines in an open source endeavor. Who would have imagined 300 Petabytes of information on any topic you can think of available at the click of a mouse.

All of these things exist within the confines of the Cyberspace we've come to expect everyday and know as the 'Internet'. These things grew to their current state because the internet is an open and pretty much unregulated framework of equipment, code and users. No one person is the king of the internet, nor are there policemen to give you a ticket for driving to fast or a legislature to dictate borish laws governing use or abilities. In other words, the internet is a place that if left untethered to a set of legal constraints or protocols, will continue to evolve, perhaps into its own intelligent entity.

In this state of development to the victors go the spoils, victors at this point being those creative individuals that develop the fastest, easiest, best looking, zowwie wowwie websites out there. Sites that keep us coming back for more... and spending our hard earned cash with them because their product or service is unrivaled.

There are however some companies and government concerns that want to change the petri dish that is the internet and turn it into a moldy bacteria ridden mess. Those companies like Comcast, AT&T, U.S. Congress, Sprint, Amazon, Ebay just to name a few want to push the little guy to the fringes of internet existence. The idea being is to eliminate any competition from up and comers. To corner their little market and keep it all to themselves. By pushing our CONgress critters to make laws that govern what we can see, or creating levels of service that in essence do the same thing or slow our connects such that our access to alternative sites is hampered they will effectively lock us into the domains of the big internet players.

This is were Net Neutrality comes in.

Network neutrality (also net neutrality, Internet neutrality) is a principle proposed for user access networks participating in the Internet that advocates no restrictions on content, sites, or platforms, on the kinds of equipment that may be attached, and on the modes of communication allowed, as well as communication that is not unreasonably degraded by other traffic.

The principle states that if a given user pays for a certain level of Internet access, and another user pays for a given level of access, that the two users should be able to connect to each other at the subscribed level of access.

Though the term did not enter popular use until several years later, since the early 2000s advocates of net neutrality and associated rules have raised concerns about the ability of broadband providers to use their last mile infrastructure to block Internet applications and content (e.g. websites, services, protocols), particularly those of competitors. In the US particularly, but elsewhere as well, the possibility of regulations designed to mandate the neutrality of the Internet has been subject to fierce debate.

Neutrality proponents claim that telecom companies seek to impose a tiered service model in order to control the pipeline and thereby remove competition, create artificial scarcity, and oblige subscribers to buy their otherwise uncompetitive services. Many believe net neutrality to be primarily important as a preservation of current freedoms.

In a nutshell, net neutrality says that governments shall not regulate the internet in any way, it keeps the playing field level for all involved, from the big Ebay's and Google's to the little ma and pa shop hocking hooter bisquits.

Mark Kirk voted NO to preserve Net Neutrality. He doesn't want ma and pa to be able to compete against the big guy. He doesn't want you to visit my site so you can read about his murderous, pimping and drug smuggling ways. He wants to fill the coffers of AT&T and Comcast with gold and in turn they will pump millions and millions into his campaign war chest.

The fight is still on, the FCC is currently drafting rules and regulations that would change the internet from the open and free wilderness to a tier big game player only cityscape. This is happening because CONgress and Mark Kirk in particular voted NO to preserve the internet as open and full of freedoms.

You can help in this fight in two ways. The first is to support groups like Save the Internet, which actively solicit our CONgress critters to do the right thing where internet freedoms are concerned. The second is to vote just like Kirk did, a resounding NO to his being a Senator.

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 3 - Cap and Trade Traitor - Climate Change Charlatan

Mon, 1 Feb 2010 15:30:27 -0600

How Climate Change fits into Mark Kirk's Agenda

Climate Change advocates blame 'Global Warming' on pollution caused by the emission of greenhouse gases in the following sectors and in the following order: industrial ( to include power plants ), transportation, residential, commercial and agricultural. These emissions are typically referred to as 'Greenhouse gases'. These are gases in our atmosphere that absorb and emit radiation within the thermal infrared range. This process is the fundamental cause of the greenhouse effect.

The main Anthropogenic greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone. Carbon Dioxide ( CO₂ ) from fossil fuel combustion is the Greenhouse gas most discussed in the last 5 years, although all greenhouse gases can affect the temperature of the Earth. Without them, Earth's surface would be on average about 33 °C (59 °F) colder than at present.

Human activities since the start of the industrial era around 1750 have increased the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Recently much of the science behind climate change and subsequently used to push cap and trade legislation has been called into question with the Climate data scandal of 2009.

The Skinny on Cap and Trade

Emissions trading (also known as cap and trade) is an administrative approach used to control 'anthropogenic greenhouse gas' pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of these pollutants.

A central authority (usually a governmental body, like the U.S. CONgress or the EPA) sets a limit or cap on the amount of a pollutant that can be emitted. Companies or other groups are issued emission permits and are required to hold an equivalent number of allowances (or credits) which represent the right to emit a specific amount.

The total amount of allowances and credits cannot exceed the cap, limiting total emissions to that level. Companies that need to increase their emission allowance must buy credits from those who pollute less. The transfer of allowances is referred to as a trade. In effect, the buyer is paying a charge for polluting, while the seller is being rewarded for having reduced emissions by more than was needed.

Thus, in theory, those who can reduce emissions most cheaply will do so, achieving the pollution reduction at the lowest cost to society, which society pays for ( that would be you and I ).

How Americans will get the Long Slow Screw

Politicians love cap and trade because they can claim to be taxing "polluters," not workers. This as you will see is not the case. Once the government creates a scarce new commodity -- in this case the right to emit carbon -- and then mandates that businesses buy it, the costs will inevitably be passed on to all consumers ( you and I ) in the form of higher prices. Stating the obvious, Peter Orszag -- now Mr. Obama's budget director -- told Congress last year that "Those price increases are essential to the success of a cap-and-trade program."

Hit hardest would be the "95% of working families" that Mr. Obama keeps mentioning, usually omitting that his no-new-taxes pledge comes with the caveat; "unless you use energy."

Putting a price on carbon is regressive by definition because poor and middle-income households spend more of their paychecks on things like gas to drive to work, groceries or home heating.

Why would Mark Kirk vote for Cap and Trade?

Most would think that since Kirk is a financial conservative he would vote against a bill that adds new taxes and costs to the American Society. However, Mark Kirk has a Financial Incentive to vote for this disasterous legislation, H.R. 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, which is nothing more than another Tax on the Poor and Middle-income households is straight forward.

His vote of YES for was bought and paid for by because of his ties to DRW Holdings of Chicago. DRW Holdings is part of the Chicago Climate Exchange. Maurice Strong sits on their board of governors. Strong was the person who put together the Copenhagen Climate Change meeting and is the driving force behind the world green movement in that category. He got in so much trouble in the US because of his chicanery that he had to flee to China where he has lived since 2000. He was also the subject of an investigation by Jesse Ventura.

So, Kirk takes lobby money from DRW Holdings, votes YES for Cap and Trade, DRW Holdings makes billions and billions by trading in Carbon Credits as mandated by H.R. 2454.

How much money did Kirk pocket from DRW Holdings for his traitorous vote? $12,000

So let me get this straight Mark, You sold America out to the tune of $100 Trillion dollars over the next 50 years for a measly $12,000 dollars?

You really are pathetic, Mark Kirk. A cap and trade flip-flop idiot actually.

The Solution to American's Mark Kirk Problem

As American's we have enjoyed the priviledge of being able to overthrow our government every 4 years thru the most fundamental of our a god-given costitutional rights, by voting in a new President and CONgress. I urge all of you to keep Mark Kirk in mind as the person NOT TO VOTE FOR come February 2nd, 2010. We need to send a clear message to Mark, that his type of politics is not welcome here anymore.

Let's Kick Kirk to the Kurb!

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 4 - Social Moderate and Anti-Family

Sat, 30 Jan 2010 17:18:03 -0600

By his own admission Mark Kirk has declared, "I am a Social Moderate". By the conclusion of this article you will see that not only is Kirk not a social moderate, but he has no real left-right, liberal-conservative ideology at all.

Kirk has simple latched his political career onto the Republican bandwagon and upon election thereafter proceeded to vote the dictates of his monied corporate campaign contributors.

Kirk has attempted explain what his definition of a Social Moderate is;

"As the co-chair of the Mainstream Tuesday Group, many in the press focus on Republican Moderates and their socially moderate views. We strongly believe in these issues but we are also fiscal conservatives. Over time, government spending cannot grow faster than our underlying economy that pays for public services. Last week, we debated the Deficit Reduction Act. Our Tuesday Group members made sure the bill dealt with the spending issue and not other unrelated concerns. That is why we successfully deleted proposals to open Alaska's National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling. It was one of the Environmental Community's biggest victories of the year. In the end, the Deficit Reduction Act reformed many automatic federal spending programs that were growing at twice the rate of the underlying economy. Given the promises we made under Social Security and Medicare, we must review other federal spending commitments to ensure we care for America's seniors. Last week, we voted to reform these other federal programs so that we will continue to afford to fulfill the promises we made under Social Security and Medicare."

Obviously little real red meat in his definition, more like a scripted for sheeple consumption on issues they hold dear.

My take on a republican social moderate is this, they are fiscally and national security conservative, but on social issues such as gay rights, ERA, abortion, tree hugging, climate change and all things green, hereafter referred to as the 'modern socialist core or MSC', they tend to side with the democrat socialist.

Does that sound like Mark Kirk to you? I can say emphatically, 'NO'.

Mark Kirk uses the issues proferred by the MSC to further his political career, I say that because of his penchant for voting the corporate line on issues where a certain Kirk campaign donor might have a vested interest. Look at my Day 11 entry entitled, "Mark Kirk, the Fattest Cat in CONgress" to see that the above MSC are only on Kirk's agenda because they put money in his campaign war chest and not because its an issue near or dear to his heart.

The unfortunate consequence of this type of behavior on the part of an elected official at a national level is that it opens our country up to the whims of the highest bidder. In Mark's case consider his vote for the 'Cap and Trade' legislation, which at it's heart is environmental. No one with a true fiscally conservative mindset would ever vote for a bill that will cost Americans what this bill will cost us and our children over the next 100 years. Conservative estimates put this at $100 Trillion, I believe now after much reflection on it, that it will be at least double.

Keep in mind Kirk also voted for bank bailouts, and millions in earmarks for his campaign donors. Does this sound like a fiscal conservative to you?

So what about Kirk's Socially moderate stances?

He voted for partial birth abortions, that's were they allow the birth to proceed, all but the head exiting the mother's birth canal. The doctor then stops the delivery at that point and grabs a long syringe or elongated sharp suction device and shoves it into the brain of the half born infant. They then proceed to suck out the brain matter until the infant is dead. The doctor then allows the infant to be born in this state, then the doctor can declare the infant still-born to protect their murdering ass.

Kirk also supports gay, lesbian and transgender rights. I've stated before that this is simply a non-issue elevated to a frantic issue by the loudest mouth on the block so as to grab back some of our freedoms and deflect the attention of conservatives away from issues of more import, like less government, less taxes, the Patriot Act and other Government usurpations. Subsequently, Kirk uses these issues to raise money and garner votes that he otherwise would accede to his democrat opponent.

We are 3 days away from voting for a truly conservative Republican candidate to fill Obama's old US Senate seat for Illinois. Do we really want to entrust that honorable chair to a man whose liberal votes and lack of fiscal accountability at the federal level have proven to be more than lacking, in fact should be considered criminal?

None dare call Kirk Progressive, but I will. In every politically bad sense of the word.

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Google Suppresses Mark Kirk Blogacause Article Series

Fri, 29 Jan 2010 22:16:46 -0600

We here at blogacause noticed something strange yesterday. All of the articles written about Mark Kirk in my 15 article series have disappeared from the top 10 results in a google blog search for the key words "Mark Kirk".

Prior to yesterday and beginning with the first day of the series, every article was at one time or another in the top 10 for a google blog search about Kirk. Most times 2 or 3 of the articles showed up in the top 20 for anything related to Kirk. Then all of a sudden, gone.

Did Mark Kirk have his NSA buddies twist a few arms at Google headquarters? We all know how Google has been in bed with the CIA and the NSA. Perhaps Kirk called in a few favors with his intelligence buddies to have google suppress my expose of the traitor Mark Kirk.

Either way, its true, we went thru over 400 search results and blogacause was not even in the top 400. Thanks google for doing no evil!

As for you Mark Kirk, go fuck yourself. I will get my message out, you will lose the election.

What next Mark, you gonna have me silenced?

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 5 - Invasion of Privacy

Fri, 29 Jan 2010 19:04:22 -0600

Today we are going to discuss Congressman Mark Kirk's Plan to Track Every American. Kirk's record on the Privacy of American citizens is appalling.

Never have I seen a CONgressman who says one thing and does another as does Mark Kirk. Never have a seen a man from the US military have such blatant disregard and hate for the American People and the Constitutional Republic in which we live.

From a previous article we know that Kirk is a real murderer, a real pimp, and a real drug smuggler. So it should surprise no one that he aggressively fights against the Bill of Rights Americans enjoy.

Let's take a look shall we.

I could go on and on and on with Mark's abysmal record on taking away rights Americans have enjoyed for 200 years. How can we vote for Mark Kirk whose CONgressional voting is dictated by his corporate sponsors?

Can we trust Mark Kirk to restore the rights of Americans? NO

Can we trust Mark Kirk to vote in favor of Americas citizen when a bill is introduced that takes away rights? NO

Do you still want to vote for Mark Kirk for US Senate? NO! and HELL NO!

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 6 - Debate DisRespect and the Disabled

Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:14:42 -0600

Originally I was going to do just an article on Kirks lack of respect for Illinoisans when he skipped out on a primary debate that he promised to attend. I've now expanded it to include Kirk's record concerning disabled folk.

Kirk's Debate DisRespect

Mark Kirk is afraid to debate his Republican opponents for the Illinois US Senate primary. After agreeing to debate on Channel 7, Kirk organizes a rival event in East Peoria to undermine WLS-TV’s debate.

Kirk was again challenged to a second debate on the 29th of January by Patrick Hughes, his lead opponent in the campaign. Kirk again declined.

Mark Kirk has ignored the voters of Illinois by refusing to attend candidate debates. He has turned his back to the conservative voters of this state and the democratic process as a whole. More than anything this type of behavior belies two things, Mark Kirk has no respect for the voters of Illinois and He knows that should he ever muster the cahones to present himself for a debate he would surely be shown to the public for the RINO murderous, drug smuggling pimp he is.

So, Kirk is holding on to his primary poll lead by avoiding any truth exposing debates, which he knows will torpedo his chance of getting the primary nod. But, beware of this Kirk and Republican leadership, we will not vote for Kirk, we will find another conservative to vote for in the general election.

Kirk's Handicaps Disabled Persons Anew

Kirk adopted the Republican Main Street Partnership agenda item:

H.R. 914/S. 872 the ADA Notification Act.

Republican Main Street Partnership Congressman Mark Foley (FL) introduced this legislation to protect the Americans with Disabilities Act from a growing number of lawyers who are generating huge sums in legal fees for pointing out accessibility violations by business when often simple fixes would bring properties into compliance with the ADA's accessibility standards. This variety of litigation abuse stems from the lack of any notification provision in the ADA. RMSP supports a 90-day delay between notification of an alleged accessibility violation and any legal proceedings. This notification will allow honest business owners to become ADA compliant without added legal expense while freeing up the courts to pursue legal action against bad players.

Basically this act, which Kirk voted YES for, is total bullshit. Consider that the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in 1990. This act mandated that businesses and public entities have to make their facilities handicapped accessible. These businesses and public entities have had 20 years to make the changes and yet some have not done so. To have gone 20 years and not brought your business into compliance with an act of legislation that would give folks with disabilities the opportunity to access your business either as a patron or a worker is inexcusable.

Mark Kirk wants to give his big money corporate friends an extra 90 days to make things right before someone with a disability can file a suit against them for non-compliance with the ADA.

Nice going Mark, thanks for screwing the disabled folks of America again.

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 7 - Public Sentiment

Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:45:36 -0600

Since I've made my feelings known about Mark Kirk, the murderer of foreign civilians - pimp for foreign prostitutes - drug smuggling - big government - disarmed citizens, Illinois candidate for US Senate, perhaps it's time to shed some light on how his constituents here in Illinois feel about him.

News Media

Back in August 2009, the Huffington Post ran a piece that basicly portrayed Kirk as a Traitor, this from a speech he gave at the Center for Strategic and International Studies how he actively worked to personally undermine the U.S. economy, and, no, that is not an exaggeration:

Kirk: "One of the messages I had [in my meeting with Chinese leaders] -- because we need to build trust and confidence in our number one creditor," said Kirk, "is that the budget numbers that the U.S. government had put forward should not be believed. The Congress is actually gonna spend quite a bit more than what's in the budget, and the health-care bill probably being the lead driver of additional spending by the Congress."

D'oh! Way to help the Chinese Mark... especially after voting for Cap n Trade.

You can check out the mixed bag from MSM news sources with this quick google search about people saying, 'No to Mark Kirk'. The downward swing in his approval ratings with the news media were a direct consequence of his opting out of the debates hosted by the media. What were you hiding from Mark?

Bloggers

The biggest opposition to Mark Kirk comes from other bloggers here in Illinois. Like myself, they know a bad dog when they see one, and every good ole' boy knows when ya gots a bad dog you gots to put it down.

I'm listing some of the 385,000 blogs that have expressed displeasure with Mark Kirk:

You get the point. Not many conservative bloggers here in Illinois like Mark Kirk. I estimate a ratio of 10 to 1 against Kirk, if not higher.

Republican National Committee

Michael Steele, chairman of the RNC still supports Kirk, however the locals are furious over this (check out the sidebar of the article where locals like myself can vote).

The National Republican Senatorial Committee endorses kirk also.

So why the huge disconnect between party leaders? The people want true conservatives, the party leaders want to win seats. Unfortunately, people won't vote for RINO's like Kirk, so the leaders end up losing the seat. This same scenario has played out over the last year, most notably with the hoffman/scozzafava debacle in the NY-23 district race.

Tea Party Opposition

Even more telling is the stalwart opposition Kirk has seen grow from those within the Tea Party Movement. Initially, Kirk got some endorsements but as people like myself and others started to lay out his horrendous past and his liberal voting record, those endorsements have been withdrawn.

Most Tea Party groups in Illinois have now vowed to stop Mark Kirk.

Sarah Palin Endorsement

I think most telling was the huge snub Sarah gave Mark Kirk. This even after he pretty much grovelled and begged for her support.

What You Can Do / How You Can Help

Now, is the time for American's to take back their government.
Now, is the time to toss arrogant, entrenched politicians out on their ears.
Now, is the time to come together as a people and make sure that liberty and prosperity are available to all who live here in America.

You can help by voting NO for Mark Kirk. You can DO something about it by telling all your friends about the information I'm putting in these 15 articles about this vicious, arrogant, pompous politician by the name of Mark Kirk.

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 8 - Kirk's Congressional Earmarks

Tue, 26 Jan 2010 22:21:48 -0600

According to some sources, for every dollar donated to Mark Kirk, they can expect $100 dollars returned to them in the form of CONgressional Earmarks. Congressional earmarks are often defined loosely as anonymously authored guarantees of federal funds to particular recipients in appropriations-related documents.

To paraphrase from the Sunlight Foundation article on earmarks.

An earmark is an item that is inserted into a bill to direct funds to a specific project or recipient without any public hearing or review. One of the problems is that there is no transparency or accountability in the system.

U.S. Congressional members can secure hundreds of millions of dollars of funding for a project without subjecting it to debate by their colleagues in the Congress, or to the scrutiny and oversight of the public. Because earmarks are hard to identify, some members use them to secretly award their biggest campaign contributors or exchange them for bribes. The secrecy of the earmarking process invites unethical and corrupt behavior, where lobbyists and contractors and well-connected individuals give campaign contributions to legislators in return for federal funding.

Earmarks are inserted anonymously as items in appropriations and other bills, or appear, sometimes as lists, sometimes embedded in text, in the House, Senate or Conference Committee reports that accompany legislation. While most earmarks tend to be located in appropriations bills, they can pop up in other bills as well.

Under current congressional rules, there is no requirement that a member identify his or her earmarks. Generally the more powerful members of the U.S. Congress get more earmarks. Members of the Appropriations Committees in the House and Senate are in the best position to secure earmarks. They can insert them into spending bills during closed committee meetings, with no public scrutiny. Earmarks are also offered to members to entice them to vote for a bill they otherwise would not vote for.

These special funding requests by lawmakers inserted into appropriations bills are draining the public coffers to the tune of around $10 billion dollars per year. Citizens can expect our CONgress critters to spend over $11 Billion for fiscal year 2010 that the publicly disclose! The actual amount is greater than $20 Billion according to the Citizens Against Gov't Waste website.

It's well know within CONgressional insiders that Mark Kirk is one of the biggest appropriators of Pork Barrel congressional spending, especially if they donated to his campaign or in some way gave him a benefit that enhanced his political career. Amazingly he came out in late 2009 during his current run for the vacant US Senate seat once held by Obama, to say that he is now against Earmarks, well kinda.

Hypocrisy has struck Congressman Mark Kirk once again, this time over his political posturing on the issue of earmarks. In a press conference in D.C. today, Mark Kirk plans to showcase that hypocrisy, while an Associated Press report out today shows that Kirk has a history of mixing earmarks and campaign contributions, with many of his earmarks going to groups who contributed to his campaign coffers over the years. In other cases, Kirk was rewarded with campaign contributions after granting earmarks to certain groups. In addition to the Associated Press’s findings, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has discovered more than $81 million in earmarks Kirk secured went to his campaign contributors. Now, as a Senate candidate, Mark Kirk claims to be against the use of earmarks, but it wasn’t until just this year that Kirk decided to stop asking for earmarks in annual spending bills.

The Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) has examined Congressional roll call votes to determine which members of Congress are voting in the interest of taxpayers and which are wasting Americans’ hard-earned money.

CCAGW rates members on a 0 to 100 percent scale. Members are placed in the following categories: 0-19% Hostile; 20-39% Unfriendly; 40-59% Lukewarm; 60-79% Friendly; 80-99% Taxpayer Hero; 100% Taxpayer Super Hero.

From the CAGW database we find that Kirk has a lifetime rating of 57%. This means that 57% of the time Kirk is Lukewarm toward his constitutents with regard to spending their tax dollars on pet piggy projects.

In 2008 Kirk scored 50%.

So how much Pork is Mark Kirk contributing to the national debt in 2009 and 2010?

Kirk the Earmark Champion is campaigning on Earmark reform. In December of 2009, Kirk held a press conference in Washington highlighting the "Top 11 Worst Spending Projects of the 111th Congress." The truth however is less than stellar. The Flip-Flop CONgressman from Northern Illinois is about to set records for Earmarks in 2009 and 2010.

$2 Million for Hibernation Genomics. In July 2009, Kirk voted in favor of the FY 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Bill that included a $2 million earmark for hibernation genomics. [HR 3326, Roll No. 675, 7/30/09; Citizens Against Government Waste, 2009 Pig Book]
$1.28 Million for the Puget Sound Navy Museum. In July 2009, Kirk voted in favor of the FY 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Bill that included a $1.28 million earmark for the Puget Sound Navy Museum in Bremerton, Washington, which is dedicated to “collecting, preserving, and interpreting the naval heritage of the Pacific Northwest for the benefit of the U.S. Navy and general public.” [HR 3326, Roll No. 675, 7/30/09; Citizens Against Government Waste, 2009 Pig Book]
$1.24 Million for Brown Tree Snake Control and Interdiction in Guam. In July 2009, Kirk voted in favor of the FY 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Bill that included a $1.24 million earmark for Brown tree Snakes control and interdiction in Guam. [HR 3326, Roll No. 675, 7/30/09; Citizens Against Government Waste, 2009 Pig Book]
$3 Million for the Consortium for Plant Biotechnology Research. In July 2009, Kirk voted against an amendment to strip a $3 million earmark for the Consortium for Plant Biotechnology Research from the FY 2010 Energy and Water Appropriations Bill. The amendment was defeated 89-335. [HR 3183, Roll No. 583, 7/17/09]
$4.7 Million for Climate Change Modeling Capability. In October 2009, Kirk voted in favor of the conference report for the FY 2010 Energy and Water Appropriations Bill that included a $4.757 earmark for climate change modeling capability. [HR 3183, Roll No. 752, 7/17/09; Citizens Against Government Waste, 2009 Pig Book]
$950,000 for the Purdue Calumet Inland Water Institute. In October 2009, Kirk voted in favor of the conference report for the FY 2010 Energy and Water Appropriations Bill that included a $951,500 earmark for the Purdue Calumet Inland Water Institute. [HR 3183, Roll No. 752, 7/17/09; Citizens Against Government Waste, 2009 Pig Book]
$1 Million to Restore Good Fellow Lodge in Indiana. In June 2009, Kirk voted against an amendment to strip a $1 million earmark to restore Good Fellow Lodge in the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore in Indiana from the FY 2010 Interior Appropriations Bill. The amendment was defeated 123-305. [HR 2996, Roll No. 470, 6/26/09]
$350,000 to Restore Magnolia Grove in Greensboro, Alabama. In October 2009, Kirk voted in favor of the conference report for the FY 2010 Interior Appropriations Bill that included a $350,000 earmark to restore Magnolia Grove in Greensboro, Alabama. The two-story Greek Revival antebellum mansion, set up on 15 acres, was the boyhood home of Rear Admiral Richmond Pearson Hobson, a hero in the Spanish-American War. [HR 2996, Roll No. 826, 10/29/09; Citizens Against Government Waste, 2009 Pig Book]
$250,000 for the Idaho Sage Grouse. In October 2009, Kirk voted in favor of the conference report for the FY 2010 Interior Appropriations Bill that included a $250,000 earmark sponsored by then-Senator Larry Craig for the Idaho Sage Grouse. [HR 2996, Roll No. 826, 10/29/09; Citizens Against Government Waste, 2009 Pig Book]
$100,000 for the West Point Historic Post Office. In October 2009, Kirk voted in favor of the conference report for the FY 2010 Interior Appropriations Bill that included a $100,000 earmark for the West Point Historic Post Office. [HR 2996, Roll No. 826 , 10/29/09; Citizens Against Government Waste, 2009 Pig Book]
$300,000 for the Joshua Tree National Park Visitor Center. In October 2009, Kirk voted in favor of the conference report for the FY 2010 Interior Appropriations Bill that included a $300,000 earmark for the Joshua Tree National Park Visitor Center. [HR 2996, Roll No. 826, 10/29/09; Citizens Against Government Waste, 2009 Pig Book]
Mark wants to Kill the Ash Borer, but doesn't want to feed poor children.

Oink Oink Kirk! You can catch all the Kirk Pork Rinds at the DSCC here.

So Kirk says he changed his mind about earmarks four years ago, and still sought and secured a small fortune in earmarks for his own district, but now that he’s running for the Senate, he’d have you know he’s *really seriously* against them!

Yeah, suuuuuuuuuuuure Mark.

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 9 - Congressional Voting Record

Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:45:49 -0600

This entry is a little different than others. I'm only going to list the websites that track Kirk's CONgressional voting record.

I encourage my readers to peruse these aggregates carefully paying attention to key votes.

Most often you will find that Kirk cast his vote for the lobbyist, PAC or special interest.

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 10 - Gun Control

Sun, 24 Jan 2010 17:57:38 -0600

Today I'm going to discuss Mark Kirk's ongoing assault on your God given right to defend yourself and your country and your country's sovereignty with firearms. This entry will fully inform you as to why your right to keep and bear arms is so important and why a fool like Mark Kirk should be kicked to the kurb for his continued efforts to take away this right of the people.

It would be instructive at this time to recall why the American citizenry and Congress have historically opposed the registration of firearms. The reason is plain. Registration makes it easy for a tyrannical government to confiscate firearms and to make prey of its subjects.

HITLER

Denying this historical fact is no more justified than denying that the Holocaust occurred or that the Nazis murdered millions of unarmed people. In 1938, Adolf Hitler enacted the "Nazi Weapons Act".

Nazi Weapons Act of 1938 (Translated to English)

Classified guns for "sporting purposes". (here in America, we classify guns for military or civilian use)
All citizens who wished to purchase firearms had to register with the Nazi officials and have a background check. (here in America all citizens have to do the same.)
Presumed German citizens were hostile and thereby exempted Nazis from the gun control law. (Recently, Janet Napolitano has said that "Patriotic" Americans are placed on watch lists for suspected terror type activities.)
Gave Nazis unrestricted power to decide what kinds of firearms could, or could not be owned by private persons. (the same restrictions apply to Americans.)
The types of ammunition that were legal were subject to control by bureaucrats. (the same restrictions apply to Americans.)
Juveniles under 18 years could not buy firearms and ammunition. (the same restrictions apply to Americans children, its up to their parents to purchase weapons for them, its also encumbent of the parents to teach them proper use.)

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country." -- Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942

As history shows, Hitler and the Nazis then went on to force the Jews into ghettoes and from there on to trains bound for one of the many death camps erected so as to exterminate as many Jews as possible for Hitler's "final solution".

RUSSIA

Unlike in the United States, where citizens have a right to bear arms under the constitution, the Russian federal government has a monopoly on gun legislation. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (Russia and all forceably held territories at the time) prohibited civilian gun ownership in 1929. For the next 70 years Russia ran roughshod over her citizens, murdering at least 50 million and sending many others to a sure death in labor camps located in Siberia, where the average temperature is 15 degrees Farenheit.

Josef Stalin once reportedly said: "We don't let them have ideas. Why would we let them have guns?" (sound familiar? it should, as our US CONgress feels the same way about us.)

Under recent reforms civilians have an opportunity to have hunting weapons, but, they must belong to a hunting club where the membership may be exclusive or the cost to join so high it becomes impossible.

AMERICA

We here in America enjoy the greatest freedom of any persons in the world with regard to private ownership of guns. Our right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment. This right is necessary so as not to allow our government to become despotic, because if they do we have a mandate as free citizens to over throw them by any means necessary and restore the republic to its constitutional state.

KIRK'S VOTING RECORD ON GUN CONTROL

The Associated Press asked every Republican and Democratic candidate running in the Senate primaries the following question: "Please explain your views on gun control, including whether the federal ban on "assault weapons" should be revised."

The following is Mark Kirk's answer: "I support the Second Amendment and sensible measures to reduce illegal gun violence." This answer really makes me laugh, only a lawyer could give such a flim flam bull-shit answer and expect the rational Americans to buy it. Congrats Mark, not many people can flip-flop in the same sentence with the same breath.

Instead of demanding the Kirk the Jirk give us a better answer I'm going to present to you his voting record on Gun Control. I'm pretty sure 'Papa Joe Stalin' would be proud of Mark.

H.R. 2159: Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009

Mark Kirk is one of the main sponsors of this Bill. This bill is To increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.

These anti-gun Republicans-in-Name-Only want to disarm you because they fear your pro-liberty views.

In fact, your love of freedom frightens them so much that they're now going to great lengths to label you a domestic terrorist.

It's the perfect way to silence "troublemakers" like you and me, and to marginalize our influence.

And make no mistake: If Congress passes H.R. 2159, Eric Holder would have the authority to deny thousands of innocent Americans their constitutionally protected rights.

But this bill isn't just about Eric Holder taking away your Second Amendment rights if you're "appropriately suspected" for "terrorism."

H.R. 2159 also allows Holder and his team of gun-grabbing henchmen to "withhold" any and all evidence from you or a court if Holder & co. "determine" that it might "compromise national security."

Keep in mind Kirk submitted this bill after Napolitano declared that patriotic American's like me who speak out are possibly terrorists.

Rated D by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun control voting record.

KIRK'S HOUSE VOTING RECORD ON GUN ISSUES - from Project Vote Smart

Date	Bill Title	Vote	Outcome
05/20/2009	Allowing Loaded Guns in National Parks HR 627	No	Concurrence Vote Passed - House (279 - 147)
09/17/2008	Repealing Portions of the D.C. Firearm Ban HR 6842	No	Bill Passed - House (266 - 152)
09/26/2006	Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives HR 5092	No	Bill Passed - House (277 - 131)
06/28/2006	Trigger Lock Amendment H AMDT 1156	No	Amendment Adopted - House (230 - 191)
10/20/2005	Firearms Manufacturers Protection Bill S 397	No	Bill Passed - House (283 - 144)
04/09/2003	Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act HR 1036	Yes	Bill Passed - House (285 - 140)

FINAL THOUGHTS ON KIRK'S GUN CONTROL

Kirk is best known among gun owners and activists for his proposal last year to revive the federal "Assault Weapons Ban" after its sunset provision ended it in 2004. He's rated "D" by the NRA ( of whom he is said to have said "the NRA is more powerful than Al-Qaeda” ) and endorsed by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership. His Gun Owners of America rating is a dismal "F-" grade. That's right, "F-minus." How does a Republican like Kirk get a rating like that? It's not easy:

Propose a new "assault weapons ban" to replace the first useless ban four years after it expired.
Propose to "close" a nonexistent "gun show loophole" that makes even less sense since Illinois already requires the background checks involved.
Propose to "close" the "Terror Gap" by prohibiting sales of firearms to anyone on the "Terrorist Watch List"--perhaps forgetting that the people on that list are not accused of any wrongdoing and are often just people with similar names--the glaring exception being Ted Kennedy. An actual accused murderer, Kennedy was removed from the list rather promptly.
Vote against a measure to prohibit frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers (the lawsuits in question were based on the actions of others with guns, not anything the manufacturers themselves did.)

Please vote NO to Mark Kirk being a candidate for US Senator from Illinois with me. We Americans already have enough on our plate fighting the leftinista agenda of Obama and the Marxists in CONgress. Do we really want to chance our freedom and our right to defend ourselves by voting in a man whose Gun Rights record is dead set on taking away one of the precious and necessary rights you have?

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 11 - Kirk the Fattest Cat in CONgress

Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:12:21 -0600

Today I'll be high-lighting Mark Kirk's monied relations with PAC's, Lobbyist's and Special Interest groups. Nothing like the smell of cold hard cash right Mark?

Not only is Mark Kirk one of the most egregious open pockets for all lobbyist, PAC and special interest monies in CONgress, he happens to be one of the biggest hypocrites about it. An interesting little factoid about Mark is that he Least often votes with Rep. Ronald Paul, the model politician in CONgress most likely not to accept Lobby, PAC or special interest money.

Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) is living up to his reputation as a fantastic fundraiser (read that as lobbyist ass kisser), bringing in $1.86 million in the last three months of 2009. According to his campaign, Kirk has almost $3.2 million in the bank heading into the Feb. 2 primary.

"Mark Kirk has taken over 3.5 million dollars from PACs in his career and they own him,"; "Anything else his campaign says is simply not true. Rather than making false accusations, he should immediately release the amount of money he raised this quarter (4th Qtr, 2009) from federal lobbyists and corporate PACs."

CORPORATE ILLINOIS LOBBIES THE US CONGRESS

Ever wonder how much money is being spent by companies and groups from Illinois to lobby the federal government? Would you believe from 1998-2004: $581,400,206

A half a Trillion dollars! From just Illinois! Do you think Mark Kirk gets any of that? You betcha!

SEIU UNION DONATION FIASCO

We all know how in 2009 Kirk did the ole' flip-flop (another one) with SEIU donations, first he wanted them, then he gave em back and paid some penance monies to his favorite charity to make everything all better. That was nice of you Mark, perhaps next time you should use those intelligence gathering skills to vet your donors better.

MILITARY CONTRACTOR DONATIONS FOR YES DEFENSE BILL VOTE

Also in 2009 we find out the Kirk took $10,000 dollar donations from large military contractors to the government so he would vote for YES on the $636 Billion dollar defense bill. I do believe this is the military-industrial(-congressional) complex we were warned about by Eisenhower. Who would have thought Kirk, a military/CIA asset, would be the master of the military contractor shakedown in CONgress.

HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY

Last campaign cycle, Mark Kirk ranked in the top ten (out of 435 members of the House and 100 members of the Senate) among all members of Congress in amount of campaign money received from the health insurance lobby.

Kirk Has Taken over $1.2 Million from the Health Industry. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Kirk has accepted $1,239,076 in campaign contributions from the health industry over the course of his career, including $666,504 from health industry PACs. [Center for Responsive Politics, accessed 11/6/09]

Guess you don't have to worry about your health right Mark?

POSITION ON SHIPPING OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY JOBS OFF-SHORE

I'm throwing this little tidbit in just to drive home to the sheeple the kind of wolf Kirk really is. While this fat cat is rolling in special interest money he endorses American companies shipping much needed tech jobs overseas. Thanks for the job Mark!

THE CHINA LOBBY

Two groups on the Hill formed to monitor China-related issues have popped up in recent months: the Congressional China Caucus, led by Rep. J. Randy Forbes, R-Va., and the U.S.-China Working Group, launched by Larsen and Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill..

The difference in the groups' stances seems to reflect a deep division in attitudes toward the Asian nation: some look at China and see a threat to the United States, but others see a potential partner.

While the Congressional China Caucus says it will "investigate China's global reach and the consequences of its growing international, economic, and political influence on U.S. interests," the U.S.-China Working Group says it will focus on finding "new opportunities for a successful and strategic relationship."

Of course the Marxist in China want to influence our CONgress critters, what better than to use Kirk the Kommie as the Progressive conduit.

THE LAW FIRM LOBBY

If your read my "Day 14 - Campaign Finance" article you will remember that one of Mark Kirk's largest donors is Kirkland & Ellis, one of Enron's law firms. K&E has never been charged with contributing to Enron's collapse, and was dropped as a defendant from one of the class action lawsuits filed against Enron and other "aiders and abettors."

But the lawyers at K&E did nothing to prevent the crimes at Enron that led to its collapse, either. (E.g., the Powers Report to Enron's board noted that K&E was the attorney for LJM1, one of the "special purpose entities" set up by Andrew Fastow to hide Enron's debt. K&E attorneys did not consult with Enron's counsel to determine if it was a "related-party transaction." Also see Ellen Pollack, "Lawyers for Enron Faulted its Deals, Didn’t Force Issue," in The Wall Street Journal, May 23, 2002)

According to Roll Call, Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) had to cancel a planned New York fundraiser in November 2005, after the official invitation explicitly linked the event to legislation attacking Sarbanes-Oxley. "Feeney has worked in recent months to make himself known as a Congressional point man on reforming the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley corporate accountability measure, meeting with industry groups and planning a “listening tour” with Reps. Mark Kirk ( R-Ill. ) and Gregory Meeks ( D-N.Y. ) on ways to make the bill’s regulations more business-friendly."

On July 23, 2004 the Washington Post reported that corporate "lobbyists already are laying the groundwork" for a 2005 Sarbanes-Oxley "technical corrections" bill.

Sarbanes-Oxley was enacted as a reaction to a number of major corporate and accounting scandals including those affecting Enron, Tyco International, Adelphia, Peregrine Systems and WorldCom. These scandals, which cost investors billions of dollars when the share prices of affected companies collapsed, shook public confidence in the nation's securities markets.

Nice job Mark, you made companies less accountable with citizen's money thanks to all that money from your law firm buddies.

Update: Kirkland and Ellis, Kirk's largest campaign contributor in 2010 Senate election

CORPORATE CRIME AND ABUSE BECAUSE OF SPECIAL INTEREST MONEY

In 2005 Mark Kirk voted to allow companies that are tax cheats to get contracts with the Dept. of Homeland Security. The bill was also known as the Accenture vote after one of the companies it would stop from getting contracts. Interestingly enough Kirk has been a regular money drop from one of Accenture's Partners, Scott Brady.

Thanks for keeping America safe Mark! Even if it is with a Corporate Tax Traitor.

AGGREGATE LISTS OF LOBBYIST's, PAC's and SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS THAT HAVE DONATED TO KIRK

CHECK OUT LOBBYWATCH

LOBBYWATCH is a tool at the Center for Public Integrity which you can use to research Lobby firms, companies and special interest groups and their monetary influence on elected members of CONgress.

COMMENTARY ON KIRK'S LOBBYIST's, PAC's and SPECIAL INTEREST MONIES

Although this article and the facts I've laid out herein are not exhaustive, I think it gives you a good look at the kind of person Mark Kirk. Greed, Avarice, Sell-out are some of the words that come to mind. Is this the kind of person we want to serve in CONgress let alone as a US Senator? I say, 'Hell No!'

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 13 Supplemental - Kirk the CIA Asset

Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:26:01 -0600

I think it's important to hi-light the kind of man Mark Kirk is. In my "Day 13 - Kirk the CIA Asset", it was revealed that Kirk was involved in over throwing legitimate governments. To accomplish this and secure funding outside of CONgressional oversight Kirk set up a huge operation in Kosovo where he over saw ’smuggling drugs, running prostitution rackets and murdering civilians’. Mark Kirk a drug runner, a pimp and a murderer. Is this the kind of person we want working for the peoples of America as a powerful Senator?

I say Hell No!

Mark Kirk helped to over throw legitimate governments while tasked as a Naval Intelligence Officer who also worked for the CIA at the same time.

Above all, Marshall makes it clear that, in 1998, the US State Department and intelligence agencies decided to use the Kosovo Liberation Army to get rid of Slobodan Miloševic. He quotes one source saying, ‘The US agenda was clear. When the time was right they were going to use the KLA to provide the solution to the political problem’ – the ‘problem’ being, as Marshall explains earlier, Miloševic’s continued political survival, as diagnosed by the spooks in Washington and London.
This meant supporting the KLA’s terrorist secessionism, and later fighting a war against Yugoslavia on its side.
Marshall quotes Mark Kirk, a US naval intelligence officer, saying that, ‘Eventually we opened up a huge operation against Miloševic, both secret and open.’ The secret part of the operation involved not only things like staffing the various observer missions which were sent into Kosovo with officers from the British and American intelligence services, but also – crucially – giving military, technical, financial, logistical and political support to the KLA, which, as Marshall himself admits, ’smuggled drugs, ran prostitution rackets and murdered civilians’.

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 12 - Endorsements

Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:46:59 -0600

It's with a bit of pleasure that I can say traffic to Blogacause has quadrupled because of my expose series on Mark Kirk. People are genuinely interested in knowing which of our elected CONgress critters need un-electing.

Just think Mark, even if you get the Primary vote, you still have 10 more months of me and I won't be backing down. Remember Dede Scozzafava? Illinoisians will fight your moderate progressive Obama driven agenda to the bitter end. Why does Progress Illinois endorse Mark Kirk?

Even more telling than the progressive endorsements that Kirk is reeling in is the endorsement he got from the Chicago Sun-times. What is so crazy about this endorsement is that the Sun-Times is probably thee most Liberal paper in the state of Illinois. Not only did they endorse Kirk, they also endorsed David Hoffman the Democrat candidate. It's pretty much unheard of for a newspaper to endorse the presumptive candidates from both ideological parties, usually when a newspaper does so it's because both candidates represent a win for the papers causes, in this case liberal progressive, regardless of whom wins the election.

So who supports Mark Kirk? While he apparently has the backing of the RNC and the NRSC, Kirk's senatorial race is shaping up to be another Hoffman/Scozzafava drama. Going into the 2010 Senate Primary Kirk is bleeding endorsements.

Some key points:

Sarah Palin fully rejected Kirk for an endorsement.

Kirk spurned an endorsement from Glenn Beck, although it's highly doubtful he will get one.

Pretty much the entire Tea Party movement fully rejects Mark Kirk, in fact, Tea Party Nation put Kirk on notice after the Brown victory, "Kirk is the next target of the Tea Party Nation".

Kirk claims he got the endorsement of the Northwest Herald out of McHenry, but I could find no such indication on their website. A search on google for this did show one link to the Herald but when I followed the link it was dead. Perhaps they rethought the endorsement because in his twitter announcement of the endorsement he wrote, "Northwest Herald endorses Mark Kirk - fight against earmarks, reduce debt, balance budget - focal pts of campaign". uhhhh, Kirk is listed as one of the biggest offenders of earmarks in Congress which I will be writing about in a later article.

The Chicago Tribune endorses Mark Kirk for Senate "Kirk is all about fiscal responsibility". Really? The $100 Trillion dollar tax payer tab for Cap and Trade is 'fiscally responsible"? The Tribune while mostly conservative does sometimes venture into the progressive, unfortunate.

Kirk also got the full endorsement from League of Conservation Voters. Pardon me while I go retch after reading the tree hugger spew they had to say about Kirk, "Leading Defender of the Great Lakes and Champion for Clean Energy is 'the kind of leader this country needs'” It should come as no surprise that the LCV is tied to the Chicago Climate Exchange of whom Mark's favorite greeny donor DRW Holdings is a member. Small green world ain't it Mark.

The National Rifle Association gives Mark Kirk an score card rating of 'F' because he is one of the rare Republicans who want to take our guns away, where I'm from we call those people Democrats.

Interestingly John McCain has endorsed Kirk. Not a plus in my view because I believe McCain threw the presidential election so that Obama could win, it's either that or he ran the worst campaign in the history of US presidential elections.

The above endorsement coverage, while a mixed bag of good and bad for Mark Kirk, highlights the divisive record that he has built in his 5 terms in CONgress. The fact that the Tea Parties are rejecting him outright should be the measure by which we conservatives vote. Mark's ties to climate changers, anti-gun rights legislation, cap and trade, and many other Obama progressive agendas make him unsuitable and unacceptable for the office of US Senator as a Republican.

Unfortunately, the IL GOP continues to live in a state of delusion saying that Illinois Republicans are unified behind Mark Kirk. What a bunch of idiots, The only Republicans unified behind Kirk are his gay staff.

So, for all of you who still think Mark Kirk is the man to endorse, remember Dede Scozzafava... Mark is the epitome of Liberal and Progressive. His record speaks volumes and it is on this that we must judge him come voting day February 2nd, 2010.

Join me as I Kick Kirk to the Kurb with a NO vote!

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 13 - Kirk the CIA Asset

Thu, 21 Jan 2010 15:53:41 -0600

What would the discerning public think if a foreign spy were found to be a member of CONgress? Would the public demand his resignation? Would he be brought up on charges?

Naturally most Americans would be angered, demanding investigations and legal actions be taken to address such a situation. Most of us are thankful this has never occurred, well, not that we know of anyway.

Now, what if an American elected to CONgress turned out to be a spy? Would our outrage be consistent? I should hope so... Then it should come as quite the shock that Mark Kirk admitted to being an asset (spy) for the CIA on the floor of the House chambers in 2004.

Naturally, Mark Kirk (Republican, 10th District, Illinois) (Candidate for US Senator Illinois) Denied the accuracy of the Congressional Record, saying he is not working for the Central Intelligence Agency. The Congressional Record, the official verbatim transcript of everything said on the floor of the House of Representatives, shows that on June 23, 2004, Kirk said he “is” working for the Central Intelligence Agency.

Kirk’s Democratic opponent in 2004, Lee Goodman, pointed out that Kirk’s employment by the C.I.A. while serving in Congress would be unethical and illegal. When questioned about the matter by a reporter for the Waukegan News Sun newspaper, Kirk said the Congressional Record was wrong. Kirk said that although he used to work for the C.I.A. while he was also working for the U.S. State Department, he no longer works for the spy agency. Oh, really, Mark?

Here is what the congressional record says:

[Congressional Record: June 23, 2004 (House)]
[Page H4859-H4880]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:cr23jn04pt2-7]
H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S
Vol. 150
WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 2004
No. 88--Part II
[[Page H4859]]
House of Representatives
INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005--Continued
[Excerpt]
Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my friend and distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), who is also a naval intelligence officer.
Mr. KIRK. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Simmons amendment. Unlike some other amendments in this bill that are offered for partisan advantage, this amendment is offered by a former CIA officer with detailed knowledge of how the U.S. intelligence community works. To my knowledge, there are only three current Members of Congress who work with the CIA: our chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), the author of this amendment; the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Simmons); and me, who is detailed to the CIA from navy intelligence.

Again, You LIE Mark Kirk!. Even worse the conflict of interest is appalling in that Congress has been struggling to investigate intelligence failures by the CIA and now it turns out Kirk is working for the CIA. No wonder Kirk voted not to investigate these failures after 9/11. He is working for the very people who didn’t want to be investigated.

Remember the embarassment our country endured because of Abu Ghraib? Kirk has a conflict in the ongoing inquiry into the CIA’s role in torturing prisoners at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. “Congress has been looking into prisoner abuse, and Kirk is working for the agency that wrote a manual on torture and that may have been instrumental in the perpetration of these atrocities,” said Goodman. “Now we know why Kirk publicly condoned the torturing of prisoners. If Congress is to have any credibility in these matters, they should toss this guy out on his ear.”

“Kirk’s CIA connection also explains his support for the Patriot Act,” said Goodman. “He works for a surveillance agency. Of course he thinks it’s a good idea for the government to be able to spy on people.”

Mark Kirk also helped to over throw legitimate governments while tasked as a Naval Intelligence Officer who also worked for the CIA at the same time.

“Above all, Marshall makes it clear that, in 1998, the US State Department and intelligence agencies decided to use the Kosovo Liberation Army to get rid of Slobodan Miloševic. He quotes one source saying, ‘The US agenda was clear. When the time was right they were going to use the KLA to provide the solution to the political problem’ – the ‘problem’ being, as Marshall explains earlier, Miloševic’s continued political survival, as diagnosed by the spooks in Washington and London.
This meant supporting the KLA’s terrorist secessionism, and later fighting a war against Yugoslavia on its side.
Marshall quotes Mark Kirk, a US naval intelligence officer, saying that, ‘Eventually we opened up a huge operation against Miloševic, both secret and open.’ The secret part of the operation involved not only things like staffing the various observer missions which were sent into Kosovo with officers from the British and American intelligence services, but also – crucially – giving military, technical, financial, logistical and political support to the KLA, which, as Marshall himself admits, ’smuggled drugs, ran prostitution rackets and murdered civilians’.

Seems to me Mark Kirk has been recommissioned by his CIA and Naval Intelligence buddies to be their eyes and ears in the US House of Representatives. Who do you work for Mark Kirk? Us or them?

To summarize:

Kirk blocked key congressional investigations into CIA intelligence failures.
Kirk publicly endorsed the torture of prisoners
Kirk fully supports the Patriot Act - Vote number 2005-627 making the PATRIOT Act permanent
on Dec 14, 2005 regarding bill HR 3199 USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act
Kirk was involved in Smuggling Drugs
Kirk ran Prostitution Rackets
Kirk aided in the murdering of innocent civilians

All of these are agregious. The most unforgiveable of these is the Patriot Act, a bill which has no purpose, even its intended purpose to protect us from terror, other than to usurp the rights of American citizens as spelled out by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Without these we cannot prevent the other atrocities that a person like Kirk has perpetrated on peoples around the world.

Do you want a spy as a US Senator? Do you want a man in a powerful congressional office who wants to legislate your God given Constitutional rights away? Do you want a man in office who thinks the Bill of Rights is best used as toilet paper? Do you want a 'family man' in office who has smuggled drugs, run prostitution rackets, and murdered civilians overseas in the commission of his job as an asset for the CIA?

I don't! Help me Kick Kirk to the Kurb!

We are coming Boldly for you Kirk, with truth and light to shine on your misdeeds... you have to question if it will be your blood, as red as any tyrant or patriot but red nonetheless, that waters the tree of liberty.

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 14 - Campaign Finance

Wed, 20 Jan 2010 23:30:05 -0600

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mark Kirk’s campaign today said that it raised nearly $1.9 million between October and December and has almost $3.2 million in the bank.

In a statement, Kirk said he was “humbled by the outpouring of support from grassroots leaders.”

Grassroots? Really Mark? I say, "You Lie!"

Let's define 'Grassroots'.

A grassroots movement (in the context of a political movement) is one driven by the politics of a community. The term implies that the creation of the movement and the group (in this context that would be people like you and I, normal everyday citizens) supporting it are natural and spontaneous, highlighting the differences between this and a movement that is orchestrated by traditional power structures.

Grassroots movements are often at the local level, as many volunteers in the community give their time to support the local party, which can lead to helping the national party.

Faking a grassroots movement is known as astroturfing. Astroturfing, as the name suggests, is named after AstroTurf, a brand of artificial grass. Astroturfing means to mimic a grassroots movement, with the powerful lobbyists behind the movement hiding their agenda by pretending to be individuals voicing their opinions.

One only needs to take a look at Kirks list of donors for his campaign to see that there are no grassroots (you and me, normal everyday citizens) contributors to his campaign. It almost entirely consists of special interest groups, lawyer firms and corporations looking for his favor in ways only an entrenched Washington politician can provide.

Open Secrets has tracked contributions to Mark Kirk, and they make a most telling statement. The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

Representative Mark Kirk has reported a total of 1,857 contributions ($200 or more) totaling $2,158,376 in the current cycle. How many people do you know in the current economic climate that can afford $200 dollars to give to a politician? I don't know any... that pretty much leaves special interests.

Who are some of these contributors? Pretty interesting people in my opinion. I have been researching the organisations and corporations that have been contributing heavily to Kirk and the results are grim.

Take for instance 'Equitec Proprietary Markets', they are one of those oh so respectable companies that the SEC has filed settled actions against based on claims of improper proprietary trading.
Then there is Kirkland and Ellis, is an international law firm with headquarters in Chicago. They gave Kirk $55,000. Problem is this law firm is almost exclusively Democrat. Kirkland, through its employees, was a top 20 contributor to Barack Obama in 2008, giving at least $493,735. Despite the firm's reputation as a conservative firm, the firm's attorneys lean heavily (77%) Democratic in their political contributions, which are substantial ($579,976 as of 10/29/07, in the 2008 election cycle). The firm also has its own Political Action Committee (PAC), which gave 97% of its contributions to Democrats in the 2008 cycle, as of 12/7/07. The firm's members have given more money to Illinois Senator Dick Durbin (by some measures the most liberal Democrat in the Senate) since 1989 than donors from any other company or organization. So, it begs the question, why would a firm that so supports the efforts of Barack Obama be giving liberal funds to Mark Kirk, unless they were sure he would vote approvingly for Obama's Progressive (sic) agenda?

Kirkland is also a front-runner in the support of legislation that favors LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender) Americans. Kirkland also supports financially a large number of LGBT advocacy groups. In 2006, the Kirkland & Ellis Foundation contributed more than $1,593,000 to the sponsorship of nonprofit organizations, foundations, and programs that directly or indirectly benefit diversity-related initiatives (including LGBT groups). Mark Kirk may not be Gay, but he sure has a lot of happy friends.

Lastly we have DRW Holdings. Hang on tight folks, the crazy train is pulling out of the station on this one.

Ever wonder why Mark Kirk voted for Cap and Trade? Emissions trading (also known as cap and trade) is an administrative approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants. This is the No. 1 reason I've come out against the American Traitor Mark Kirk. This bill alone will cost you and your children $100 Trillion over the next 100 years, if not more.
Mark Kirk voted FOR Cap and Trade because of his ties to DRW Holdings of Chicago. DRW Holdings is part of the Chicago Climate Exchange. Maurice Strong sits on their board of governors. Strong was the person who put together the Copenhagen Climate Change meeting and is the driving force behind the world green movement in that category. He got in so much trouble in the US because of his chicanery that he had to flee to China where he has lived since 2000. He was also the subject of an investigation by Jesse Ventura.

World’s first environmental derivatives exchange
More than 400 member organizations
10% owned by Goldman Sachs
10% owned by Generation Investment Management LLP
The exchange is owned by the London-based Climate Exchange PLC which also owns the European Climate Exchange, Montréal Climate Exchange, and the Tianjin Climate Exchange.
Wow Mark, you got friends in greeny high places!
Other members of the CCX that have contributed to Mark Kirk include Baxter International, Goldman Sachs, Exelon Corp., and the list goes on and on.
So, now we know why Mark Kirk voted FOR Cap and Trade, he is in bed with the Obama progressives and it appears fully supports their agenda to do away with our American Constitution via ratification of the Copenhagen Treaty. How's that climate change treating you Mark? Puttin' a little money in yo pockets? Cold, Frozen Cash I'm sure...

On top of all that, over 20% of Kirk's campaign contributions come from out of state. In other words, organisations and donors that do not have a vested interest, nor do they reside in the state of Illinois have contributed over $415,000 to make sure Mark Kirk stays in CONgress and votes against the better interests of his Illinois constituency.

Mark Kirk has been calling for the U.S. Census to sever its partnership with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) because of SEIU’s alleged ties to the community organization ACORN. ACORN has been the subject of intense scrutiny by conservatives, and rightly so, because of its corruption related to its advocacy work on behalf of low- and moderate-income people and particularly because of its efforts to mobilize voters which entailed voter intimidation and illegal voter registration.

What Kirk fails to disclose is the shocking fact that he accepted donations from SEIU. Kirk has said that he’ll give $2,500 to charity to offset the fund’s he accepted from SEIU’s political action organization in 2003, and would also “donate” a “proportional share” of $19,000 he’s taken since 2000 from the Republican Main Street Partnership PAC. That group backs moderate GOP candidates (Kirk’s status therein has been a bit of a problem for him as he tries to energize a less moderate Republican base statewide), and has accepted some $90,000 in contributions from SEIU’s PAC since 2001.

Gee that's really upstanding of you Mark, too bad you only did this after you got caught with your Marxist hand in the Union Cookie Jar. Mark Kirk only went gang-busters on ‘ACORN as SEIU’ after those two kids filmed the goofs of ACORN across the country assisting in child sexual slavery and kidnapping and covering up an international crime.

All of a sudden, a Navy fighter pilot and Intelligence officer, like Mark Kirk understands that SEIU might just have far less than the best interests on the American middle class at heart?

Kirk had this to say about his involvement with SEIU and ACORN, “Originally I saw it as a Chicago union.” Sure You did Mark!

Hey Mark, If you want to get the support of a union even bigger than SEIU, then try supporting the union of States called America.

In closing, can we afford to elect Mark Kirk? The most common argument for supporting Mark Kirk seems to be centered on his being electable and that the party takes precedence over issues. This type of thinking is inconsistent with independent critical thinking skills that a free citizenry need to have so that a Republic continues to exist. It's the type of adage that says, don't think just do, leave the choices to us. Not far from calling you sheeple after that.

So, for all of you who still think Mark Kirk is the man to support, hurry up and Donate to Mark Kirk's Campaign... Before The Cost of Everything Goes Up Thanks to his vote on Cap and Trade. His corporate climate change donors will thank you.

Join me as I Kick Kirk to the Kurb! Seems that the Tea Party Nation is gonna help me defeat Mark Kirk. Check the Tea Party Nation out.

Catch all 15 articles in the Un-elect Mark Kirk Series at Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Mark Kirk - Count Down to Un-election - Day 15

Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:25:48 -0600

Today begins my 15 day series that will focus on Mark Kirk and why we Illinois voters need to Un-elect him. We need to send a message to the Republican National Committee (RNC) that "Republican's In Name Only" (RINO's) are not welcome in the party traditionally thought to be conservative. If we cannot convince the party that people like Mark Kirk are bad for the country and hence bad for the party then it's time to start a new party that evinces our expectations.

The information I will present against Mark Kirk is more than just Republican or Democrat, Liberal or Conservative. They are issues that will affect every person in this country, and will directly impact how much of your hard earned money you will bring home at the end of a long work day or how many of the precious freedoms we have enjoyed as a nation will still exist if our elected are allowed to continue their treasonous path of legislating them away in the name of security or some other false-flag emergency reason to keep cutting off chunks of the Constitution and our Bill of Rights.

I will show you that our CONgress-persons, like Mark Kirk, have no interest in halting the debt ridden spending spree in Washington DC, instead preferring to remain part of an out of touch elitist puppetry who cares not that he and the rest of CONgress are enslaving you and your children to a 100 years of debt with an estimated cost of $100 Trillion dollars.

Mark Kirk was elected to the US House of Representatives in 2000 riding the wave of discontent that American's were feeling after 8 years of the Clintonistas. Well educated with a military intelligence officer's background it was hoped that his being elected would bring a congressman to the chambers who could make a difference and be one of those who could set this great country back on the path our founding fathers started down 200 years ago.

Unfortunately, Mark Kirk has become just another capitol hill crony with his lips stuck permanently to the lobbyist teat.

I will be writing an article every day over the next 15 days that focuses on one aspect of Mark Kirks political career, shananigans, and typical cronyism that we've come to expect from our esteemed leaders in CONgress.

I'm laying out the schedule for said articles herein so that you know what to expect and so you can click on the list to go to that article. As follows

Kirk has had 10 years to make a difference in CONgress, he failed. It's time for him to get sent home to live under the crappy legislation and the onerous debt he has saddled our society with.

I'm asking my readers to forward the information I will be presenting to interested voters, in the hopes that you will endeavor with me to Kick Kirk to the Kurb. Let's start 2010 by making a change in Congress that will make a true difference and restore the Republic.

The Incestuous Relationships in Congress

Sun, 17 Jan 2010 01:24:30 -0600

In light of all the deal making and breaking going on in Congress of late, I thought it appropriate to highlight the behind the scenes bipartisanship we never hear about on capitol hill.

So, without further ado, here is how I feel about the two parties in Congress, better known as, "I'm My Own Grampa". When you see the schema that is part of the video you will get my tie in to CONgress.

I dedicate this entry to our once and future failure President, Barack Obama. Your reign over the inbred Congrefs is a true spectacle to behold.

Republican Contenders for the US Senate Seat in Illinois

Wed, 13 Jan 2010 22:20:34 -0600

My alternate title for this entry is "who else is a better candidate than Mark Kirk?". It has become very clear to me that we must begin a concerted effort now to stop Mark Kirk from being our candidate for the Illinois US Senate seat. I've written before about the many reasons Mark Kirk is not an acceptable Republican candidate.

A short list as follows:

Mark Kirk found to be one of the eight traitors who voted for cap and trade
Mark Kirk Lies to get Senate Candidacy
Mark Kirk Paid $10000 By Each Defense Contractor So He Votes Yes on $636 Billion Defense Spending
Congressman Mark Kirk has repeatedly claimed he supports the Second Amendment; however, he has a gun-control voting record. He is a supporter of reinstating the assault weapons ban. Therefore, the National Rifle Association has given Congressman Kirk a grade of “F.” The Gun Owners of America organization gave Kirk a grade of “F-.”

Do we really want to re-elect a man who voted to strap our children with TRILLIONS of dollars of future debt which the cap and trade legislation will do? Do we want a liar as our Senator, who keeps flip flopping on issues and says he is a conservative but then votes like a moderate? Do we want a man like Kirk who takes 10s of thousands of dollars from Defense contractors and then votes Yes for the most expensive defense bill in history? Do you want a man like Kirk who keeps voting to disarm American citizens?

I say NO! Enough is enough. Let's find a better alternative to Mark Kirk and kick this on-the-take bum to the curb where he belongs.

For more on Kirks Legislative voting record check out Vote Smart.

So just who are the alternatives?

Republicans

Donald Lowery, This guy is a retired circuit court judge. He seems to have the best chance of beating Kirk and having looked at his judicial record, his membership in the NRA, and his detailed position on issues important to Americans who look to the Constitution for guidance I think he would be a perfect replacement versus Mark Kirk. Lowery is active in the Tea Party Movement.
Andy Martin, this guy is totally unacceptable as a candidate. Frivilous lawsuits, barred from practicing law.
Kathleen Thomas, Of all the republican candidates Kathleen seems to be the most traditional, opposing cap and trade, opposes higher taxes, opposes Obamacare, believes in the right to keep and bear arms.
John Arrington, John Signed the Quincy Tea Party Pledge, which indicates his support for all the platforms as laid out by the tea parties.
Patrick J. Hughes, While I detest the thought of another damn lawyer being voted into a federal office, Hughes seems to have a good chance at beating Kirk. He has the endorsement of several Tea Party chapters.

WHO SHOULD REPUBLICANS SUPPORT?

For the many anti-american reasons above Kirk is ineligible for election as a conservative patriotic candidate. Kirk even went so far as to say he is social moderate, which is just another way of saying he is a moderate socialist. We need a man of conviction, willing to fight for Americans and the constitution, you sadly are not that man Kirk.

If Republicans give Kirk the Nomination instead of a better candidate like Lowery, Thomas or Hughes, I'm throwing my support behind Mike Labno (Libertarian). Mike is a normal everyday working American, an Engineer & Construction Manager, who believes that the constitution is our supreme document detailing how this country should be run. He is even taking constitution refresher courses! Are you listening Republican National Committee! Can you hear us now?

Timothy Geithner: Inside Traitor or Fox Guarding the Hen House

Thu, 7 Jan 2010 20:09:29 -0600

When are charges going to be brought against Geithner? I mean seriously folks...

Early on we know that he helped AIG keep their bonuses and we also know he doesn't have a clue on the current economy. Many feel he should have been forced to resign over just those two issues.

We find out today that An arm of the Federal Reserve, then led by now-Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, told bailed-out insurance giant AIG to withhold key details from the public about overpayments that put billions of extra tax dollars in the coffers of major Wall Street firms, most notably Goldman Sachs.

Why do we allow people who work in the industry at high level positions to assume high level positions in government? This is an obvious conflict of interest if not subversion of the office by outside corporations. In days of old they would have called it, 'The fox guarding the hen house.'

Tim Geithner must be made an example of. Bring him up on charges of insider trading, collusion to commit fraud, suppression of evidence, you name it... charge this common thief with the whole book for all I care. He needs to go to jail.

Mark Kirk Hates Senior Citizens and the Disabled

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:21:14 -0600

Mark Kirk and his RINO buddies are having a gay ole' time partying it up on our tax tab. How is Mark Kirk's congressional voting and actions, or lack thereof, affecting people like myself who depend on Social Security because we are disabled and unable to work? The short answer is We are not faring well under Kirk, its called poverty.

Senior citizens and Disabled folk will not be getting a Cost of Living Increase this year and yet Mark Kirk and most of our CONgress critters voted themselves hefty raises for 2009. Steve Gold has a nice little write up about our Social Security disability checks versus the reality of the Poverty Theshold. CONgress claims that the Cost of Living actually went down, but do consider that this is tied to an index (of CONgress' choosing) that doesn't take into account factors that disabled and retired citizens have to face. The official threshold is adjusted for inflation using the consumer price index.

Social Security checks have gone up automatically every year since 1975, when the first automatic cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) took effect. Prior to that, a separate act of Congress was required to grant any adjustment to compensate for inflation. But this January 2010, there won’t be any COLA, for the first time in the 35 years.

The reason is simple: The official measure of the cost of living has gone down, not up.

And the major reason for that is that oil prices plunged from the peaks of the previous year.

Our COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) is tied to the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W), which is tabulated by the career professionals at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. And from the third quarter of 2007 to the third quarter of 2008 (the period determined by law) the CPI-W went up 5.8 percent.

But now things are different. The CPI-W peaked a year ago, just before the 5.8 percent increase was calculated, and took a nose dive in the months that followed. Quarterly figures won’t be available until October, but based on monthly figures, the CPI-W now stands 1.9 percent below where it was 12 months before.

I don't know about you, but my food costs have gone up by at least 10% and I'm still buying the same things. My cable, gas and electric all went up by an average 5 to 10 percent and yet the CPI-W went down. How come?

One word explains this discrepancy: OIL

That’s not the only factor of course. Plunging home prices and a recession that has brought about historically low mortgage rates have also had their effects on the CPI. But the major factor has been wild swings in the price of crude oil and everything made from it.

Few motorists have forgotten that the price of regular gasoline at the pump exceeded $4 a gallon not long ago. Regular gasoline peaked at a national average of over $4.11 in early July 2008 – during that crucial third quarter used for calculating the COLA. But then the world price of crude oil collapsed, diving from a peak of $137 per barrel in July 2008 to a low of less than $35 in January, according to weekly averages from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Senior citizens and Disabled often have special diets, home medical services, handicap augmented transportation and other extra expenses not usually found in a normal family household. These are also not part of the CPI which is used to determine if we get a Cost Of Living Adjustment.

A consumer price index (CPI) is a measure estimating the average price of consumer goods and services purchased by households.

Two basic types of data are needed to construct the CPI: price data and weighting data. The price data are collected for a sample of goods and services from a sample of sales outlets in a sample of locations for a sample of times. The weighting data are estimates of the shares of the different types of expenditure as fractions of the total expenditure covered by the index. These weights are usually based upon expenditure data obtained for sampled decades from a sample of households. Although some of the sampling is done using a sampling frame and probabilistic sampling methods, much is done in a commonsense way (purposive sampling) that does not permit estimation of confidence intervals. Therefore, the sampling variance is normally ignored, since a single estimate is required in most of the purposes for which the index is used. Stocks and OIL greatly affect this.

So, the CPI is an estimate of our Cost of Living derived from weighted (numbers added or subtracted arbitrarily) values that can be adversely impacted by the stock markets and the Energy Industry Indexes! We disabled and senior citizens are getting no increase in our checks in 2009 because CONgress, Bankers, Stock Market manipulators and BIG OIL messed up the economy and almost precipitated a crash of the stock markets which went way down anyway. Nice.

Whatever the causes, Social Security recipients are going to feel squeezed this January, simply because they have become accustomed to annual increases. And about one in every four really will be squeezed, because their Medicare premiums will increase. The AARP estimates the number at 11 million. Thanks Mark Kirk for doing nothing while we sink further into poverty.

The U.S. House & Senate have voted themselves, respectively, $4,700 and $5,300 raises ...

Mark Kirk voted to not give you a S.S. Cost of living raise in 2010 and 2011.

Your Medicaid premiums will go up $285.60 for the 2-years and You will not get the 3% COLA: $660/yr. Your total 2-yr loss and cost is -$1,600 or -$3,200 for husband and wife.

Over 2-yrs they each get $10,000
Mark Kirk voted to spend all the Social Security surplus.
Do you feel SCREWED?
Will they have your cost of drugs - doctor fees - local taxes - food, etc., increase?

NO WAY. They have a raise and better benefits. Why care about you? You never did anything about it in the past. You obviously are too stupid or don't care.

Do you really think that Nancy, Harry, Chris, Charlie , Barnie, etal, care about you?

SEND THE MESSAGE -- You're FIRED.. IN 2010 YOU WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO GET RID OF THE SITTING CONGRESS: Up to 1/3 OF THE SENATE, AND 100% OF THE HOUSE.

MAKE SURE YOU'RE STILL MAD IN NOVEMBER 2010 AND REMIND THEIR REPLACEMENTS NOT TO SCREW UP.
It is ok to forward this to your sphere of influence if you are finally tired of the abuse.

Maybe it's time for the........

proposed 28th Amendment:
"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators or Representatives, and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."

proposed 29th Amendment:
"Members of Congress shall be limited to two consecutive terms in office. They may serve a final third term of office after having not served for one term."

Let's get this passed around, folks - these people in Washington have brought this upon themselves!!! It's time for retribution. Let's take
back America.

Vote Mark Kirk Out of Congress!

Ever Wonder How Muslims spend All That Oil Profit?

Sun, 27 Dec 2009 18:34:41 -0600

They buy Mercedes Benz vehicles. But not just any kind of Mercede Benz.

Try one made of pure WHITE GOLD! Whew... good to know that what's left only went to fund terror...

So much for the The myth of the poor, oppressed jihadist.

Angel Tree Wants to Give 50,000 Kids Christmas Presents!

Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:37:26 -0600

I know some of the people that work for Angel Tree. I know how they work so diligently to make sure that the children of people who are in jail get gifts during the Christmas season. They have a real heart felt desire to make sure these children are served by the Christian community, to show these kids that someone cares about them and their incarcerated parent.

You can check out some of the thousands of videos that show Angel Tree and its work at this link.

Of all the charity programs out there this one is very transparent using almost 100% of the donations for the purchase and distribution of toys to the children. If I was asked which of the charities I think most worthy of your support this one would certainly be No. 1.

Angel Tree is a ministry that reaches out to the children of inmates and their families with the love of Christ. It seeks to transform the lives of these families and to reconcile them to their Heavenly Father and each other.

Six million. That’s the cumulative number of prisoners’ children served by Angel Tree in the U.S. over the past 27 years.

That's a lot of kids and a lot of presents. YOU should help them out with a donation this year.

Again, I am not affiliated with this organization, I just love that they help kids.

Maybe YOU can Help WeAreChange Bring More Christmas Cheer

Wed, 23 Dec 2009 23:49:14 -0600

Came upon this great video of the WeAreChange organization in New York that gives Christmas presents to underprivileged children. The looks of joy on the faces of those children really will touch your heart.

These are people that truly want all the greatness of America and they have a heart for helping those in need.

WeAreChange is a citizens based grassroots peace and social justice movement working to reveal the truth behind the events of September 11th, as well as the lies of the government and corporate elite who remain suspect in this crime. In addition, we are here to aid the sick and dying first responders through fundraising and social outreach programs in order to promote awareness of those who suffer from physical, emotional, and psychological traumas they received in the aftermath of 9-11. We also seek to meet other local citizens who are interested in educating the public while engaging in peaceful demonstration about the pertinent issues that are affecting our lives each and every day. Furthermore, We Are Change is a nonpartisan independent media organization comprised of patriot journalists working to hold those engaging in activities that do not represent the wishes of “We the People” - by asking the hard questions that the controlled mainstream media refuses to do.

I also want to state that I'm not a part of this org., I just like the fact that they help poor kids.

Hey Obama, this is real American Change...

Mark Kirk Paid $10000 By Each Defense Contractor So He Votes Yes on $636 Billion Defense Spending

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:39:50 -0600

Nice Job Rep. Mark Kirk, you managed to help the marxist congress spend another half a trillion of the American tax payers money. I was reading an article about how 151 members of CONgress have up to $195 million invested in major defense contractors, while those same contractors are earning mega profits from the US military occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since being in CONgress hasn't made Mark a Millionaire, yet, he is not one of those fine upstanding members of said august body capitalizing through investment on our tax dollars.

Instead Mark Kirk gets his CONgressional candy the ole' fashion way, corporate payola and influence money to help you vote for your corporate sponsors. I suppose Mark that as you yelled out your 'aye' on the historic vote to spend all this defense money, laden with so much pork we could hear it squeal here in Illinois, those $10,000 payments that large defense contractors paid your campaign cmte suddenly had purpose.

Seems you can't make up your mind Mark. It appears you are a fair weather friend Mark, voting for who ever tosses the most green your way. Or maybe your one of those politicians Americans have come to know so well, who will say anything to get re-elected. You Mark Kirk flip flopped on Gitmo, You Mark Kirk flip flopped on Climate Change, and you Mark Kirk flip flopped on cap and trade. Getting nervous Mark? Or maybe the cash didn't hit your hand fast enough and you didn't know how to vote til it did? I know someone who can help you get your resume spiffed up... looks like you will need it.

I also suppose your objective as hell when you vote our tax dollars away after a total of 1,857 contributers (giving $200 or more) gave you or your campaign committee, lobbyist and PAC monies totaling $2,158,376 in the current cycle 2009-2010. To search these itemized contributions for Mark Kirk, click here.

A nifty profit for them and a cash deposit in your bank account, right Mark?

Who are these large defense contractors that gave Mark Kirk $10,000 so he would vote to spend more than half a trillion dollars on defense?

Contributor
Total
Indivs
PACs
Boeing Co
$10,250.00
$250.00
$10,000.00
Caterpillar Inc
$10,250.00
$250.00
$10,000.00
General Dynamics
$10,000.00
$0.00
$10,000.00
Northrop Grumman
$10,000.00
$0.00
$10,000.00
Raytheon Co
$5,000.00
$0.00
$5,000 (shame on you Raytheon, your not holding up your end of the congression pocket fillers union.)

Contributor	Total	Indivs	PACs
Boeing Co	$10,250.00	$250.00	$10,000.00
Caterpillar Inc	$10,250.00	$250.00	$10,000.00
General Dynamics	$10,000.00	$0.00	$10,000.00
Northrop Grumman	$10,000.00	$0.00	$10,000.00
Raytheon Co	$5,000.00	$0.00	$5,000 (shame on you Raytheon, your not holding up your end of the congression pocket fillers union.)

I guess it doesn't matter that some of these defense contractors who gave you money are quite late on fullfilling their projects due dates, milking the government for millions and sometimes billions above the contract specification because of cost over runs, delays, corruption, graft and plain old cronyism.

We should only be funding defense items that support national defense and/or keeps our guys safe while fighting the 'war on terror' during these sad economic times.

I'm sick of people like you Mark Kirk. You have betrayed your country for the almighty dollar and you are no longer welcome to represent American's.

Whose side you on Mark? You get voted in as a Republican (supposed to be conservative) and yet you Mark Kirk vote with the Socialist Democrats on all the key items that Marxist Obama wants passed.

And you want Sarah Palin's Endorsement, Not Likely!

Update: Will Co. Tea Party Alliance plans to "Stop Mark Kirk"

I'm throwing my support behind Mike Labno (Libertarian). Mike is a normal everyday working American, an Engineer & Construction Manager, who believes that the constitution is our supreme document detailing how this country should be run. He is even taking a constitution refresher courses! Are you listening Republican National Committee! Can you hear us now?

Poppycock and Stupidity from the Shores of Jersey

Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:55:10 -0600

Allah Pundit over on HotAir wrote about a recent episode of the Jay Leno show, wherein Jay had some of the cast members from the TV reality series 'Jersey Shore' playing a 'Battle of the Celebrity All-Stars' in which they were asked questions about or shown pictures of famous people in politics.

Mind you, up until this point I've never watched a 'reality' show. Oh, Maybe I've dabbled at the edges, catching a youtube excerpt here and there for the laugh value or if it has some 'historic' significance like Susan Boyle's rise from obscurity. Most of them are just mindless dribble, meant to purvey the false hope that 'you too can be a superstar' and to keep the sheeple occupied while Obama's New World Order begins its occupation of the good ole' USA.

After viewing the video excerpt of this battle of the dimwits, I was left wondering if this was scripted or real. Can these people really be this dumb? Did they not go thru the same learning experience I went thru with grade school and high school? Let's look at some of their questions and answers:

Shown a picture of Libyan leader Colonel Whacky Kadafi one of the 'contestants' said he was actually Grammy Award-winning, musical icon Lionel Richie.
Shown a picture of Thomas Edison one of the 'contestants' said he was a guy named Enist.
Shown a picture of The current U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, one of the contestants said his name was Crohn, as in the bowel disorder.
Asked which wall our 40th president, Ronald Reagan, asked to be torn down (the Berlin Wall), one of the 'contestants' said he tried to have the Hoover Dam destroyed.

Jonah Goldberg over at National Review wrote of 'Jersey Shore', "When the not-so-hidden cameras catch one of the girls cheating on her boyfriend with a housemate sporting a pierced you-know-what, that’s just pure entertainment. 'You have your penis pierced. I love it,' the drunken vamp exclaims." and he then goes on to extol the series with, "Don’t get me wrong; it’s great television."

Really Jonah? A person cheating on their partner, unable to answer simple historical questions and having a pierced penis is pure entertainment and great TV? Glad you didn't set the standard too high. One can only wonder if you were born there and share the same lack of critical thinking skills our pierced penis loving celebrities exhibit.

Somehow, with a sinking feeling in my gut, I believe this was not scripted. If it's not, this truly is a national disaster, maybe even an emergency among other bad things. Is it any wonder people are not up in arms over what CONgress and Obama are doing to this country... if they are not intelligent enough, given their lack of knowledge regards history, how can we expect them to 'get' why what's happening in DC is so very wrong for America.

Anyone else feeling a great sadness? or perhaps brushing up on your chinese language skills? But I digress, we should let the vamps get back to their pierced penises.

As always, Mr. Obama, keep the change...

Media and Police Misrepresent Utah Husbands Right to Remain Silent

Thu, 17 Dec 2009 06:23:57 -0600

I blame the police for this also. Consider how I found the following article, Police treating missing Utah mom as criminal case using this link; Police say husband of missing Utah mom is 'uncooperative'. While it matters in the end if he is guilty or not of doing something to his wife, one thing must be made very clear.

He has a right to remain silent.

Is he truly being 'uncooperative', or is he invoking his right to remain silent.

The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects witnesses from being forced to incriminate themselves. Historically, the legal protection against self-incrimination is directly related to the question of torture for extracting information and confessions from accused. Since torture is generally not done here in the United States, police use other tactics to get the info or confession... like saying in the main stream media that a person is uncooperative, etc.

So lets take this opportunity to give you a quicky legal lesson if you ever become a suspect or are arrested.

When questioned by the police you will say the following exact words, "I have nothing to say" as your answer. I will not put any of the following as my answer, "I plead the 5th" (they might have made a law to prevent this being used) or "no comment" (thats refusing to answer) or "I don't know" (if they find out you do know, you committed fraud and other laws).

By simply stating, "I have nothing to say", You've answered the question in such a way that they cannot come back and say you did so fraudulently or you refused to answer. With the words, "I have nothing to say", You've answered truthfully and to the best of my ability and knowledge. If you say anything else, you risk getting in serious legal trouble.

Always insist on a lawyer being called into to talk for you.

I highly recommend the following two videos that could save you from jail time. They will teach you what to say to police, or not to say, and they will show you the various tactics and tricks police use to get a 'confession' out of you wether its true or not... These are must watch videos for every citizen:

Defend and Use your rights people, or you will lose them.

As always, Mr. Obama, keep the change.