PDA

View Full Version : Another money laundering operation in the making, an Infrastructure Bank




johnwk
09-05-2011, 11:13 AM
.
SEE: Infrastructure bank could be part of Obama’s jobs package (http://bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/20110901infrastructure_bank_could_be_part_of_obama s_jobs_package)

By Associated Press
Thursday, September 1, 2011

WASHINGTON — A national infrastructure bank that would entice private investors into road and rail projects could be a major part of the jobs package that President Barack Obama hopes will finally bring relief to the unemployed.”


We are just learning how the Washington Establishment has funnel BILLIONS upon BILLIONS of American taxpayer dollars to foreign banks (http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/jborowski/federal-reserve-documents-reveal-massive-foreign-b) under Congress’ money laundering operations called TARP, and now they are planning another money laundering operation called an “Infrastructure bank”___ a crony capitalism scheme to reward the friends of big government and plunder our national treasury.


Of course, this would be another misappropriation of federal revenue unauthorized by our written Constitution just as the federal Department of Education is through which a record $122 BILLION a year is now laundered and has over 5,000 employees with outrageous salaries and benefits given them with the expectation they will return the favor with campaign contributions and volunteer their time during federal elections to keep the Washington Establishment’s iron fist in tact.

And, keep in mind that the leadership of both political parties work together in this massive plundering of our national treasury. Was this not made crystal clear when both political party leaderships joined hands and passed the unconstitutional No Child Left Behind Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Child_Left_Behind_Act)? Is that not our current Speaker of the House in the picture with a big fat grin on his face?

John Boenher needs to point to the provision in our federal Constitution under which Congress has been delegated a power to tax for, spend on and regulate public school systems established under State Constitution. I seem to recall this question of power was addressed in the Federalist Papers:

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.

The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.” _______ Federalist No. 45

And to make certain the above words were given force and effect the Ninth and Tenth Amendments were quickly added to our Constitution which state:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people.

And finally, our very own Supreme Court articulated the limited powers of our federal government:


The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act.

Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.

If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law: if the latter part be true, then written constitutions are absurd attempts, on the part of the people, to limit a power in its own nature illimitable.

Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void. ____ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

So tell us Mr. Speaker of the House, under what provision of our Constitution is Congress authorized to tax for, spend on and regulate a public school system established under a State Constitution?


JWK



Our federal government personifies a living creature, a predator: it grows, it multiplies, it protects itself, it feeds on those it can defeat, and does everything to expand its powers and flourish, even at the expense of enslaving a nation’s entire population.

johnwk
09-05-2011, 05:39 PM
Here is part of Obama’s jobs plan:


EPA regulations for coal-fired power plants could force shut downs (http://www2.tricities.com/business/2011/may/25/wood-gives-dire-warning-due-epa-regulations-coal-f-ar-1062322/)


James Wood, deputy assistant secretary for the U.S. Department of Energy said:

the most unsettling thing is what could happen to manufacturing jobs in the event of a shutdown in places like Conesville, Ohio, where the local power plant has 10,000 workers within a 10-mile radius.


Regarding oil drilling see: Billions of dollars & thousands of jobs lost with Obama’s Gulf drilling moratorium (http://conservative-outlooks.com/2010/06/03/billions-of-dollars-thousands-of-jobs-lost-with-obamas-gulf-drilling-moratorium/)

Also see:Obama Underwrites Offshore Drilling (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203863204574346610120524166.html)

You read that headline correctly. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration is financing oil exploration off Brazil.

The U.S. is going to lend billions of dollars to Brazil's state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil's Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. Brazil's planning minister confirmed that White House National Security Adviser James Jones met this month with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan.


In regard to "green jobs" see: China labor edge tops Obama's 'green' jobs (http://www.chinapost.com.tw/business/americas/2010/02/05/243785/China-labor.htm)

President Barack Obama is spending US$2.1 million to help Suntech Power Holdings Co. build a solar-panel plant in Arizona. It will hire 70 Americans to assemble components made by Suntech's 11,000 Chinese workers.


And with regard to Obamacare see: Obamacare’s casualties: 800,000 jobs (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/feb/11/obamacares-casualties-800000-jobs/)


JWK



Are we to forget Obama’s already promised Shovel Ready jobs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4p4-vPrcDBo&feature=player_detail page) that he later joked about after plundering out national treasury?

A Son of Liberty
09-05-2011, 05:46 PM
Another bubble in the making.

tangent4ronpaul
09-05-2011, 06:20 PM
Obama backed down on the EPA regulations and drilling.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903648204576552942759170496.html?m od=googlenews_wsj

President Barack Obama is expected to use his jobs speech to Congress on Thursday to blunt business and Republican criticism that his administration is engaged in regulatory overreach.

In the run-up to the speech, Mr. Obama on Friday abandoned a proposed Environmental Protection Agency rule tightening air-quality standards. The administration also says a regulatory review will save businesses more than $10 billion over five years, and it eased offshore drilling restrictions in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska.

tangent4ronpaul
09-05-2011, 07:29 PM
As 9.1 percent unemployment plagues America this Labor Day, major unions are clashing with a Democratic administration with which they normally would march in lockstep. Echoing the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, at least seven unions are begging the Obama administration to abandon regulations, statements and procedures that prevent jobs from being created or saved.

Several labor unions decry the Environmental Protection Agency’s existing and prospective rules, mainly designed to reduce coal emissions. These stalwarts of the liberal left resemble capitalists who now call the EPA the Employment Prevention Agency.

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view/2011_0905obama_losing_ground_with_labor_unions_won der_which_side_he_is_on/srvc=home&position=also