Wednesday, November 29, 2006


The Daily Reckoning PRESENTS: Despite the cheery economic outlooks, the dollar is continuing to disappoint. Dr. Kurt Richebächer takes a look at the factors that have put the brakes on U.S. economic growth. Read on…
Kurt Richebächer
In his recent speech in Berlin, Greenspan was amazingly frank about the "increasingly less tenable U.S. current account deficit," suggesting that foreign investors would eventually reach a limit in their desire to finance the deficit and diversify into other currencies or demand higher U.S. interest rates.
In essence, he expressed the new consensus view in America that the dollar has to bear the brunt of reducing the U.S. current account deficit. Clearly, American policymakers want a lower dollar, apparently entertaining strong hopes that this will take care of the U.S. trade deficit, and we suspect that they regard it as an easy solution for this problem.
We doubt first of all that it is a solution at all. Such expectations essentially presuppose that an overvalued dollar is the main cause of the U.S. trade deficit. This is bogus. By the measure of purchasing power, the dollar was hardly out of line with the currencies of other industrialized countries.
The favorite American explanation for the huge and growing trade deficit is the U.S. economy's superior growth performance and lacking foreign demand. But the Chinese economy is growing much faster than the U.S. economy yet has a big trade surplus. So had Japan in the late 1980s, and so had Germany in the decades to the late 1970s.
This explanation of the trade deficit with superior U.S. GDP growth is another illusion among many others. What crucially matters for a country's trade balance is not its economy's growth rate, but its internal resource allocation between consumption and investment. High rates of saving and investment make for a strong trade balance, while high rates of consumption make for a weak trade balance. America's unusually poor trade performance reflects extremely poor rates of saving and investment. Overconsuming and undersaving America lacks the necessary capital stock to increase its exports.
These observations essentially raise the question of whether or not the falling dollar is prone to rebalance the U.S. economy's foreign trade. It is argued that the dollar's slide did a great job slashing the U.S. trade deficit from 1989-1993. This is true, but was it really the falling dollar that did it? It actually happened against the backdrop of a sharp slowdown in credit growth and a recession in 1991.
During the four years 1989-93, total credit in the United States - financial and nonfinancial - grew by a cumulative $3,255 billion, or $819 billion per year. In flagrant contrast, during the four years to mid-2004, overall credit grew virtually three times as fast, by $2.4 trillion per year, and there is no letup in sight. Drawing on past experience, a fall of the dollar, however steep, will hardly make a dent in the trade deficit by itself.
Lowering the trade deficit first requires a lowering of domestic demand growth, and a drastic shift in resource allocation away from consumption and toward investment in the longer run. A mere fall of the dollar is definitely no solution. Yet we very much doubt that policymakers in Washington have the slightest intention to implement or foster the necessary changes in demand and resource allocation with policy measures.
What about the risks for the dollar and the markets? In short, they are frightening. The most frightening risk is that the dollar's fall gets out of control. Superficially, the dollar's steep fall in the 1980s and '90s may seem encouraging in this respect.
However, there is something that makes all the difference between then and now. When the dollar's decline started in 1985, dollar assets held by foreigners were close to zero. This time, they are close to $9,000 billion, one-third of which is held by central banks.
The dollar's further behavior will largely depend on the flow of news about the U.S. economy. Bad economic news is bad for the dollar. For the reasons explained earlier, we expect very bad news that will shatter the hollow optimism about the economy and the stock market. While economic growth is sharply decelerating, inflation is accelerating, a main reason for this being an accelerating rise in import prices.
In such circumstances, the Fed will face a Catch-22. With CPI inflation above 3% at annual rate and a falling dollar, a new easing of monetary policy is absolutely impossible. Rather, the market will expect the Fed to continue its rate hikes. But doing so, it would prick the carry trade bubble in bonds with disastrous effects, first on the bond market and then on the economy.
A steeper fall of the dollar, just by itself, might please U.S. policymakers. Unfortunately, it is bound to have a variety of harmful effects - in particular on psychology, inflation rates and interest rates. It may finally dawn on people that due to the horrendous magnitude of the existing imbalances, the development in the economy and the markets is out of control.
After many months of stability during 2004, the dollar has turned south all of a sudden. Observing the U.S. economy's deteriorating performance since early this year, its protracted stability surprised us. Now its sudden slide perfectly concurs with our dismal expectations for the U.S. economy in 2005. Yet the abrupt general bearishness of dollar forecasts strikes us as ominous in comparison with the highly bullish consensus growth forecasts for the economy (those for Europe are distinctly bearish).
Let us try to make sense of these contradictions. Over time, we have learned the hard way that two different things govern the behavior of markets: first, the objective facts; and second, the general perception of the facts. They can differ like black and white.
Our opinion about the economic situation in the United States has been and remains diametrically at variance with the optimistic consensus view that discarded the economy's slowdown as a "soft patch" due to the rising oil price. In our view, the economy is rapidly losing steam because prior aggressive monetary and fiscal stimulation has largely spent itself, while having failed to initiate the desired self-sustaining investment recovery. Moreover, we hold a strong opinion that the existing outrageous imbalances and structural dislocations in the economy make a normal, sustainable economic recovery flatly impossible.
Pondering the causes and implications of the dollar's sudden plunge, it ought to be recalled that global currency experts were overwhelmingly forecasting a strong dollar and a weak euro, commensurate with expected strong economic growth in the United States and sluggish economic growth in Europe.
There rules a perception in the markets that the U.S. economy is fundamentally strong and, in addition, vastly superior to that of Europe in resilience and flexibility. All that is sheer nonsense. Due to years of unimaginable credit excesses and resulting monumental imbalances, the U.S. economy is highly vulnerable to a sudden downturn. It is, in fact, in worse shape than in 2000.
U.S. policymakers and economists are hailing the dollar's fall as a boom for exports, employment and profits. They fail to realize that the consumer borrowing and spending excesses of the past few years have grossly depleted the economy of available resources for sharply higher exports. A plummeting dollar does nothing at all to offset the profound structural shortfall of savings and capital formation. Rather, it fuels inflation.
Remarkably, the dollar has plummeted despite highly optimistic expectations about the economy's outlook as reflected in stellar growth forecasts. It is our assumption that increasingly bad economic news will shake this overconfidence and speed up the dollar's decline.
For reasons already explained, we expect that sharply weaker consumer spending will soon distinctly slow the U.S. economy. Two events in particular are putting the brakes on economic growth: first, the full stop of the income creation through tax cuts; and second, the waning of the housing and mortgage refinancing booms.
The risks are frightening.
Kurt Richebächerfor The Daily Reckoning
Editor's note: Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker once said: "Sometimes I think that the job of central bankers is to prove Kurt Richebächer wrong." A regular contributor to The Wall Street Journal, Strategic Investment and several other respected financial publications, Dr. Richebächer's insightful analysis stems from the Austrian School of economics. France's Le Figaro magazine has done a feature story on him as "the man who predicted the Asian crisis."
This essay was adapted from an article from the December edition of:
The Richebächer

Sunday, November 26, 2006


National Prayer Network
TV that’s All Gay, All Day
By Harmony Grant
Viacom Int., proud purveyor of the bump-and-grind trash pouring from MTV and VH1, has a new offering for the uplift of America: Logo, “the channel for gay America.”
While an ABC news poll shows that 58 percent of Americans believe gay marriage should be illegal, Jewish leftists (like Sumner Redstone, head of Viacom), are pushing against the grain for the gay agenda. 1
At NPN we have been criticized for generalizing about the anti-Christ activism of organized Jewry. But when it comes to pushing for the normalization of homosexuality, progressive Jewry is proud to take credit.
The World Congress of GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender) Jews boasts 50 member organizations. In New York alone, gay Jewish organizations include Congregation Beth Simchat Torah, OrthoDykes, and OrthoGays.
Although some Orthodox rabbis stand fast on Leviticus 18:22 and its prohibition of sodomy, Reform Judaism has been ordaining gays and lesbians since 1990. According to the Jewish daily Forward, conservative rabbis will soon join them, consecrating same-sex marriage and ordaining homosexual rabbis. 2
Last November, Abe Foxman (national director of the Anti-Defamation League) and Rabbi Eric Yoffie (president of the enormous Union for Reform Judaism) gave back-to-back speeches attacking the Christian right. Yoffie’s union is the largest Jewish organization in the United States and includes over 900 congregations.
What did this supposed man of God have to tell his flock? At the Union's biannual convention, Yoffie sermonized to around 5,000 attendees about the “appalling” idea that one group of people might have found the absolute truth about God.
“What could be more bigoted than to claim that you have a monopoly on God,” he huffed. You’d hope a man who thought he was wrong about God wouldn’t be delivering a sermon. But that irony was apparently lost on Yoffie.
He went on to denounce the “homophobia” of the religious right, comparing it to Nazism. “There is no excuse,” he said, “for hateful rhetoric that fuels the hellfires of anti-gay bigotry.” Like Foxman, who also compared Bible-believing Christians to Nazis, Yoffie obviously thinks it’s just fine to fuel the hellfires of anti-Christianity.
Forward magazine praised Yoffie’s and Foxman’s blisteringly anti-Christian screeds for giving “voice to something their constituents have been thinking and feeling for a long time.”
One thing Jewish America is clearly thinking and feeling is that homosexuality deserves public acceptance. In a 2004 Forward article, Jay Michaelson explained the liberalizing of Jewish attitudes toward sodomy. He quoted Jeremy Gordon, a student leader at the Jewish Theological Seminary: “[Homosexuality] has become one of the most important issues for the movement and the seminary and something leadership from across the movement feel needs to be readdressed.”
Michaelson, who directs Nehirim: A Spiritual Initiative for GLBT Jews and edits Zeek: A Jewish Journal of Thought and Culture, comments that even conservative Jews are considering new ways to read Jewish laws against sodomy. But he says media shapes the sensibilities of American Jews more than sacred texts ever will. “The rapid change in the status of gay people within the Jewish community owes as much to [TV show] Queer Eye as it does to novel interpretations of Leviticus.”
Will evangelicals also be more influenced by media’s gay agenda than by their own sacred text, the Bible? Jewish activists hope so. With TV shows like Will and Grace (which ran for 8 years and won truckloads of awards and award nominations), films like Brokeback Mountain, and now an all-gay channel, Jewish media moguls’ motives are clear: Bring gays out of the closet and kick Christian morals to the curb.

1 ABC, Gary Langer, June 5, 2006 2 Forward, “Key Rabbis Say Conservative Judaism Will Lift Gay Ban,” Jennifer Siegel, Aug 25, 2006
Harmony Grant, the niece of Rev. Ted Pike, is a staff writer and researcher for the National Prayer Network. For more of her articles go to
Learn much more about the threat of liberal Jewish activism at Google's video site shows Rev. Pike's videos, The Other Israel, Hate Laws: Making Criminals of Christians, and Why the Mid-East Bleeds, in their entirety, free of charge. Just search for "Ted Pike".

Please visit
National Prayer Network, P.O. Box 828, Clackamas, OR 97015

Back to Top

?2005 National Prayer Network, Inc. All rights reserved.

Friday, November 17, 2006



Download Attachment: Refund.pps

There is no need to worry about high property taxes because the IRS has us covered with a tax break. Check out the the above link for a power point from the IRS.


I visited my hair dresser yesterday, and what a wonderful lady Su is. Her only son, Eric, is now on his second tour in the Army in Iraq. Of course, Su does not know where he is headed, but does know that he is presently in Kawait. Su's little television was on Lifetime yesterday, which is what I noticed when walking in to her little shop at her home. It is too hard for Su to watch CNN or any other news station now, and she is confused about the politics going on, as she told me that she heard all of the troops would be out in six months according to something that she heard on the news. It is wrong for the politics taking place in the news because there are real families that are in turmoil. I told her that I would pray for him, and to let me know an address to send him a card. As of yesterday, Su does not have an address to send a Christmas gift to her only son. I always marveled at how Su seemed to be able to allow Eric to be a man and grow up (I think he is the ripe old age of 20), while I always worried about my own son when he was in the Marines, and didn't want to let go of telling him how to live his life. But yesterday, Su said "I want my baby home." We all need to remember during Thanksgiving and Christmas, the sacrifices of the thousands like Su that are depressed during these holidays. Remember Su in your prayers, and her son Eric, and pray for all of the brave protecting our freedom.


Toys for Tots, which is ran by the Marine Corp Reserves will now accept Jesus dolls. I knew that this was a grave mistake, and that the Marines, as usual, would do the right thing. Semper Fi.


Because of voter apathy, taxpayers have no one to complain to. The government is so swollen out of proportion that our elected leaders hire consultants to help them do a job that they are supposed to do. Our broke government in Macon, Georgia is getting us further in debt by financing a convention hotel that there is not a demand for. Mercer University is in the process of building a hotel that will be suitable for out of town guests, and we still have the Crowne Plaza that has vacancies most of the time. The financed convention hotel is nothing more than a gimmick to keep the insiders with cash flow that taxpayers will support for years to come. It is a shame to watch the abuse of taxpayers that takes place in Macon and Bibb County, but it will continue to take place from now on. It is business as usual. If you feel like a do, then here is an imaginary complaint button.

Tuesday, November 14, 2006


Looking for the exit ramp
By Patrick J. BuchananNovember 14 , 2006
It appears the Beltway bombing halt agreed upon at the Bush-Pelosi summit is over.
The incoming chairmen of the Senate's armed services and foreign affairs committees, Carl Levin and Joe Biden -- and Majority Leader Harry Reid -- say a phased withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq will be their first priority. Troop redeployment, says Reid, "should start within the next few months."
White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolton counters: "I don't think we're going to be receptive to the notion there's a fixed timetable at which we automatically pull out because that would be a true disaster for the Iraqi people."
John McCain says we need more troops to crush the Mahdi Army and militias, and achieve victory. If we set a deadline for withdrawal, said McCain, we risk a Saigon ending, with Americans being helicoptered off the roof of the U.S. embassy. McCain appears to be adopting the George Wallace stance of 1968 -- "Win, or Get Out!"
And so we come to the endgame in a war into which we were plunged by Bush Republicans and those neoconservatives now scurrying back to their think tanks, and the Clinton-Kerry-Edwards-Biden-Reid-Daschle Democrats, who voted Bush a blank check in October 2002 to get the war issue "out of the way" before the elections.
America has been horribly served by both parties. And as the Democrats have now captured Congress, they assume co-responsibility for the retreat from Mesopotamia. Which is as it should be.
While our leaders never thought through the probable result of invading an Arab nation that had not attacked us, we had best think through the probable results of a pullout in 2007.
We are being told that by giving the Iraqis a deadline, after which we start to withdraw, we will stiffen their spines to take up greater responsibility for their own country. But there is as great or greater a likelihood that a U.S. pullout will break their morale and spirit, that the Iraqi government and army, seeing Americans heading for the exit ramp, will collapse before an energized enemy, and Shias, Sunnis and Kurds will scramble for security and survival among their own.
Arabs are not ignorant of history. They know that when we pulled out of South Vietnam, a Democratic Congress cut off aid to the Saigon regime, and every Cambodian and Vietnamese who had cast his lot with us wound up dead, in a "re-education camp" or among the boat people in the South China Sea whose wives and children were routinely assaulted by Thai pirates.
In that first year of "peace" in Southeast Asia, 20 times as many Cambodians perished as all the Americans who died in 10 years of war.
In Iraq, a collapse of the government and army in the face of an American pullout, followed by a civil-sectarian war, the break-up of the country and a strategic debacle for the United States -- emboldening our enemies and imperiling our remaining friends in the Arab world -- is a real possibility.
Yet what Edmund Burke said remains true: "(N)o war can be long carried on against the will of the people." And the American people are losing, if they have not lost, the will to continue this war. They are weary of the daily killing and dying, and of the endless talk of "progress" when all they see is death. They believe the war was a mistake, and they want to come home.
Our hawkish elites bemoan the fact that Americans seem ready to give up on Iraq when U.S. casualties are not 10 percent of those we took in the Korean War. That is because they do not understand the nation.
Americans are not driven by some ideological vocation to reform mankind. We do not have the patience or perseverance of great imperial peoples. If an issue is not seen as vital to our own liberty and security, we will not fight long for some abstraction like democracy, self-determination or human rights.
It is a myth that we went to war to save the world from fascism. We went to war in 1941 because Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. That Hitler had overrun France, booted the British off the continent and invaded Stalin's empire was not a reason to send American boys across the ocean to die.
In 1990, Americans were not persuaded to throw Iraq out of Kuwait until Bush 1 got to talking about Saddam's nuclear weapons. Even after 9-11, Americans were skeptical of marching to Baghdad until we were told Saddam was building weapons of mass destruction and probably intended to use them on us. Americans have often had to be lied into war.
Democrats are probably reading the country right. Americans will not send added troops to Iraq, as McCain urges. They want out of this war and are willing to take the consequences.
But those consequences are going to be ugly and enduring. That is what happens to nations that commit historic blunders.


September 11, 2006 Issue
Copyright © 2006
The American Conservative
Fascists Under the Bed
by Patrick J. Buchanan
“President Likens Dewey to Hitler as Fascist Tool.”
So ran the New York Times headline, Oct. 26, 1948, after what Dewey biographer Richard Norton Smith called a “particularly vitriolic attack in Chicago” by Harry Truman.
What brings this to mind is President Bush’s assertion that we are “at war with Islamic fascism” and “Islamofascism.”
After the transatlantic bomb plot was smashed, Bush said the plotters “try to spread their jihadist message—a message I call, it’s totalitarian in nature—Islamic radicalism, Islamic fascism, they try to spread it as well by taking the attack to those of us who love freedom.”
What is wrong with the term Islamofascism?
First, there is no consensus as to what “fascism” even means. Orwell said when someone calls Smith a fascist, what he means is, “I hate Smith. ” By calling Smith a fascist, you force Smith to deny he’s a sympathizer of Hitler and Mussolini.
As a concept, writes Arnold Beichman of the Hoover Institution, “fascism ... has no intellectual basis; its founders did not even pretend to have any. Hitler’s ravings in Mein Kampf ... Mussolini’s boastful balcony speeches, all can be described, in the words of Roger Scruton, as ‘an amalgam of disparate conceptions.’”
Richard Pipes considers Stalinism and Hilterism to be siblings of the same birth mother: “Bolshevism and fascism were heresies of socialism.”
Since the 1930s, “fascist” has been a term of hate and abuse used by the Left against the Right, as in the Harry Truman campaign. In 1964, Martin Luther King Jr. claimed to see in the Goldwater campaign “dangerous signs of Hitlerism.” Twin the words, “Reagan, fascism” in Google and 1,800,000 references pop up.
Unsurprisingly, it is neoconservatives, whose roots are in the Trotskyist-Social Democratic Left, who are promoting use of the term. Their goal is to have Bush stuff al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran into an “Islamofascist” kill box, then let SAC do the rest.
The term represents the same lazy, shallow thinking that got us into Iraq, where Americans were persuaded that by dumping over Saddam, we were avenging 9/11.
But Saddam was about as devout a practitioner of Islam as his idol Stalin was of the Russian Orthodox faith. Saddam was into booze, mistresses, movies, monuments, palaces, and dynasty. Bin Laden loathed him and volunteered to fight him in 1991, if Saudi Arabia would only not bring the Americans in to do the fighting Islamic warriors ought to be doing themselves.
And whatever “Islamofascism” means, Syria surely is not it. It is a secular dictatorship Bush I bribed into becoming an ally in the Gulf War. The Muslim Brotherhood is outlawed in Syria. In 1982, Hafez al-Assad perpetrated a massacre of the Brotherhood in the city of Hama that was awesome in its magnitude and horror.
As with Khaddafi, whom Bush let out of the penalty box after he agreed to pay $10 million to the family of each victim of Pan Am 103 and give up his nuclear program, America can deal with Syria, as Israel did after the Yom Kippur War—for an armistice on the Golan has stuck, as both sides have kept the deal.
America faces a variety of adversaries, enemies, and evils. But the Bombs-Away Caucus, as Iraq and Lebanon reveal, does not always have the right formula. Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran all present separate challenges calling forth different responses.
Al-Qaeda appears to exist for one purpose: plot and perpetrate mass murder to terrorize Americans and Europeans into getting out of the Islamic world. Contrary to what Bush believes, the 9/11 killers and London and Madrid bombers were not out to repeal the Bill of Rights, if any ever read it. They are out to kill us and we have to get them first.
Hamas and Hezbollah have used terrorism, but like Begin’s Irgun and Mandela’s ANC, they have social and political agendas that require state power to implement. And once a guerrilla/terrorist movement takes over a state, it acquires state assets and interests that are then vulnerable to the U.S. military and economic power.
Why did the Ayatollah let the American hostages go, as Reagan raised his right hand to take the oath? Why has Syria not come to the rescue of Hezbollah? Why has Ahmadinejad not rocketed Tel Aviv in solidarity with his embattled allies in Lebanon? Res ipsa loquitur. The thing speaks for itself. They don’t want war with Israel; they don’t want war with the United States.
“Islamofascism” should be jettisoned from Bush’s vocabulary. It yokes the faith of a billion people with an odious ideology. Imagine how Christians would have reacted had FDR taken to declaring Franco’s Spain and Mussolini’s Italy “Christo-fascist.”
If Mr. Bush does not want a war of civilizations, he will drop these propaganda terms that are designed to inflame passions rather than inform the public of the nature of the war we are in.
September 11, 2006 Issue

Thursday, November 09, 2006


v=L724tuuO1ws&feature=response_watch "BAD MOON RISING" BY CCR AND COVERED BY ANOTHER BAND

The sun has set on the Neocons even if for a short while. I heard Newt Gingrich on Neel Boring Boortz today, and he was on there tooting his horn again. There will be fools in the GOP that allow Newt to pretend that he had nothing to do with the demise of the Moral Majority. Newt played a big hand with getting AIPAC money to swing into the hands of the GOP, and this was the marriage made in hell. Those that pledge allegiance to Israel ahead of their allegiance to America caused our headaches in the Middle East. If Israel had never been given authority to displace Palestinians 60 or so years ago, we would no doubt have much more peace in the Middle East. Wars will continue to go on because the Jews cannot get along with their Muslim cousins and vice versa. So I suppose Newt thinks that he can come in now and blame everyone but himself for this hijacking of the GOP that costs many their principles that they once had before heading for Washington DC. I have read a few of the local blogs, and as usual, the young political pundits are making excuses as to why we lost and pretending that being a red state in a blue sea still gives the southern Republicans credibility. The problem is that people do not look beyond their own front door, nor do they look beyond the state borders to understand that not everyone thinks like a southernor. Will they ever learn? I think that they will not learn from their mistakes of slamming everyone that has a different opinion from Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and the writers and planners that dictate talking points from the top down. The GOP is not grass roots, at all, as they long ago threw away the seeds of what makes America great, which is people like me and my clients that can think for ourselves. It is too bad that the talking heads think that only they know what the problems are, and think that the rest of us are morons that blindlessly vote for their reelection of politicians that are corrupt. It is time for a change, and now let us see the Democrats lead and show the American public that is not so easy to lead during a time of war. We do not need for Newt to rescue us, he has done enough damage.

Sunday, November 05, 2006


With all of the scandals about homosexuality, and the recent revelation that Ted Haggart (I believe that is his name) was leading a dark life is causing some that do not understand Christianity to think that somehow Christ's church will be destroyed. So what if a political party fails, as anything built upon absolute power over others is doomed for failure. But Christ is everlasting, and will overcome. We are all sinners, and many false Christs have come to power using others to enrich themselves. Where Christ is, there the devil resides, too. As a Christian, I will continue to pray to be strong in this changing world. With each passing day, there are more and more people that are growing to hate me and other Christians because they hate Jesus Christ. I do not understand the hatred because he gave more love to so many than we can imagine. I will not allow his sacrifice for me and the rest of humanity to be in vain, will you?