"INSIDE JOB" - CONTRIVED CRISIS

By Marilyn M. Barnewall
March 25, 2011
NewsWithViews.com

A Film for All Seasons

Regardless of how little or how much you think you understand the current financial crisis, make plans to see the movie ‘Inside Job’ while it is still playing in theaters – or, the DVD is now available (see below). The film will mesmerize, horrify and stun you as it explains what caused the pain and suffering through which so many Americans have lived.

‘Inside Job’ begins with New York’s skyline scrolling across your movie screen – and then proceeds to take on the bankers behind the financial crisis. It is an excellent explanation of the terrorist attack against America’s economy, featuring research and extensive interviews with financial insiders, politicians, journalists, and academics.

The term ‘inside job’ is defined as a crime committed by a person holding a position of trust. The film was written, directed and produced by Charles H. Ferguson, who describes his movie as reflective of "the systemic corruption of the United States by the financial services industry and the consequences of that systemic corruption."

On the downside of the film, as a commercial banker, I find it offensive that Ferguson doesn’t distinguish between investment banks like Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, and J.P. Morgan Chase – the troublemakers – versus the First National Bank of Main Street. Most non-bankers don’t understand the difference – but when you’re filming a movie to inform the public, it’s usually a good idea to get informed. It was the unlawful acts of investment banks that caused the crisis, not those of your community’s commercial banks.

In this movie, you will find risk taking, impulsive decisions involving trillions of your tax dollars, cocaine, prostitution – and that’s just one day on Wall Street. When, in an interview, Ferguson is asked, “Why wasn’t a more intense investigation undertaken?” his answer is the only logical one: “Because they might find the culprits.”

‘Inside Job’, won the Cannes Film Festival and a 2010 Academy Award for Best Documentary. After watching this film, American taxpayers can declare themselves winners of the “Sucker of the Year” Award in just about every category of economic ignorance. This film offers a harsh dose of truth to those who prefer to ignore it. You will see the greedy reality of intentional fraud perpetrated by politicians and too big to jail banksters.

Ferguson’s film is supported by interviews with Nouriel Roubini, Barney Frank, George Soros, Eliot Spitzer and others. But the mega achievement of ‘Inside Job’ is the voice of Jason Bourne – oops, I mean, actor Matt Damon (who plays Jason Bourne in the Bourne film series). Damon narrates while viewers watch investment bankers and the American government begin the takedown of the Goose that has always laid America’s Golden Eggs. It is a chilling film and one that has made many viewers angry.

‘Inside Job’ stabs deeply, exposing extensive and unethical conduct (including obvious and shameful conflicts-of-interest) of many professors of economics. The movie is particularly hard on Frederic Mishkin, a Federal Reserve governor until August 2008 and now a professor at Columbia University. According to the film, Mishkin co-authored a fraudulent paper titled "The Stability of Icelandic Banks." Iceland’s economy failed. Mishkin didn’t make known the Iceland Chamber of Commerce’s $124,000 payment to him to write the paper. I’d call that a “conflict of interest.”

As you watch, the moderator lists the elements of Mishkin’s conflicts of interest to John Campbell, the chairman of Harvard's Department of economics. Campbell is speechless, truly at a loss to explain this kind of unprofessional behavior. He is obviously bewildered when asked about potential professorial conflicts-of-interest in his own economics department at Harvard.

In his ‘Inside Job’ interview, George Soros says: “Chuck Prince famously said we have to dance until the music stops. Actually the music had stopped already when he said that.” Prince is the former CEO of Citigroup. Soros is also called upon by Ferguson to comment on the Glass Steagall Act… strange, having a known communist comment on the single most important piece of legislation passed to protect American consumers after the Great Depression.

The film focuses on change within the financial services industry. The first two articles I wrote for NewsWithViews.com in October 2008 present the history of the banking industry. I recommend reading them before watching ‘Inside Job’ to help keep things in a proper perspective. You can find them here and here.

There is no doubt, as the film clearly says: deregulation preceded the evolvement of complex investment products – like derivatives – and there is no doubt that derivatives increased risk-taking within the investment banking community. Why was it allowed? Good question.

There is also no doubt that as new products were introduced into the marketplace, regulations designed to prevent conflicts of interest and risk-taking were required. As the history of banking proves, all of the consumer protections put in place after the Great Depression were removed, not just the past ten years on which ‘Inside Job’ focuses. The worst of deregulation occurred twenty and thirty years ago. Our 2007 crisis is, I believe, a planned event that had to be set up long ago for it to occur.

One of the things ‘Inside Job’ points out is the prevalence of the revolving door between corporations and government. It has given America a full house of Goldman Sachs employees who were heavily involved in policy-making positions leading up to the current economic chaos. Financial regulators should not be able to leave a government job and be immediately hired by investment banks (where knowing how to beat the regulators at their own game results in multi-million dollar incomes).

Reviewers of ‘Inside Job’ all comment on what a bold move Matt Damon made when he agreed to narrate this film. I think not. I believe ‘Inside Job’ has a strongly biased, anti-capitalism tone. It’s an excellent film… but all of those progressives and liberals didn’t get in the movie by accident. Damon is anything but pro-capitalism. His public political statements place him to the far left – even left of Barack Obama. ‘Inside Job’ gives the Big Screen’s ‘Jason Bourne’ the reason he needs to bash the candidate for whom he so strongly campaigned. To Matt Damon, socialism has not yet been achieved and for that he blames Obama.

In public, Matt Damon has taken Obama to task, saying he’s “disappointed in the health care plan and in the troop buildup in Afghanistan.” In ‘Inside Job,' Damon takes Obama to task for surrounding himself with “those who pushed deregulation.” I’ve written articles about this topic, explaining that politicians who want more power (or a power structure change) ignore existing regulation. I repeat: They ignored existing regulations after deregulation occurred. Why?

Anyone who understands banking knows that if regulations aren’t enforced, major problems will result. The expected crash from not enforcing regulations occurred in 2007 and everyone yelled for “more regulation!” And, the politicians got the power they needed to cover up the unlawful behavior that caused the crisis in the first place. In reality, had the 2007 regulations in place been enforced, the crisis would not have occurred. Though this film focuses on deregulation, it pays little attention to regulations ignored – a far greater cause of the crisis than deregulation of the ten years on which “Inside Job’ focuses (that’s why I see a hidden agenda).

Informed viewers of the film will accept the truths presented, learn from them, and will recognize the somewhat subtle, liberal attack against capitalism. Informed viewers realize we have not had ‘capitalism’ in this country for many years and that when someone blames ‘today’s’ capitalism for our economic ills, they don’t understand what capitalism really is. Or, they do understand and want to get rid of it.

‘Inside Job’ correctly points out that there was no push on the feds to pursue any criminal cases against executives on Wall Street, but doesn’t report that two years before the financial crisis began, the FBI informed Congress about the dangers of derivatives, liar loans, sub-prime loans, and the inability of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to monitor the products Wall Street was so aggressively pushing. How did the liberal Congress reward the FBI? It cut its investigative staff by over half. The film does not point this out, preferring to place more blame on corporate America than on politicians.

When watching ‘Inside Job’, you will know immediately that you aren’t in Michael Moore’s fairy tale land watching his comedy, ‘Capitalism: A Love Story.’ This film is smart. It brings to light heretofore unpublicized facts. Be careful you don’t get lured into the ‘capitalism has failed’ trap. Capitalism didn’t – and has not – failed. Like our political parties, it was taken over by an oligarchy of thieves.

You can watch a ‘trailer’ of ‘Inside Job’ here. Or, you can listen to Dylan Ratigan (MSNBC) interview author, director, producer Charles Ferguson here. I found the DVD at Amazon.com for $14.99. It’s worth that – and more. The film was made on location in the United States, Iceland, England, France, Singapore, and China.

In his New York Times review of ‘Inside Job’, Paul Krugman says:

“I think this film will stay with us; when you ask how the even worse crisis of, say, 2015 happened, the fact that these people got away with it will loom large.”

Krugman is right – probably one of the few times I will agree with him. The fact that Bernie Madoff’s butt is the only one sitting in prison is evidence of the total lack of a Rule of Law in America.

© 2011 Marilyn M. Barnewall - All Rights Reserved

________________________________________

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall began her career in 1956 as a journalist with the Wyoming Eagle in Cheyenne. During her 20 years (plus) as a banker and bank consultant, she wrote extensively for The American Banker, Bank Marketing Magazine, Trust Marketing Magazine, was U.S. Consulting Editor for Private Banker International (London/Dublin), and other major banking industry publications. She has written seven non-fiction books about banking and taught private banking at Colorado University for the American Bankers Association. She has authored seven banking books, one dog book, and two works of fiction (about banking, of course). She has served on numerous Boards in her community.

Barnewall is the former editor of The National Peace Officer Magazine and as a journalist has written guest editorials for the Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News and Newsweek, among others. On the Internet, she has written for News With Views, World Net Daily, Canada Free Press, Christian Business Daily, Business Reform, and others. She has been quoted in Time, Forbes, Wall Street Journal and other national and international publications. She can be found in Who's Who in America, Who's Who of American Women, Who's Who in Finance and Business, and Who's Who in the World.

Web site: http://marilynwrites@blogspot.com

E-Mail: marilynmacg@juno.com

DECENTRALIZING THE CENTRALIZED POWER OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE

STATE BANKS

By Marilyn M. Barnewall
March 20, 2011
NewsWithViews.com

"It is time to declare economic sovereignty from the multinational banks that are responsible for much of our current economic crisis. Every year we ship over a billion dollars in Oregon taxpayer dollars to out-of-state and multinational banks in the form of deposits, only to see that money invested elsewhere. It's time to put our money to work for Oregonians." --Bill Bradbury, former Oregon Senate President and Secretary of State, quoted in The Nation.

One of the hottest topics in the world of banking is State Banks. Oregon, Washington and Maryland have recently joined Illinois, Virginia, Massachusetts, California, Florida and Hawaii in evaluating the wisdom of implementing a “State Bank.” Governors of these States need to be careful because there is a great deal of disinformation on the subject suddenly appearing in a variety of places… it almost looks like a George Soros stealth attack.

States that have passed legislation involving sovereignty and the right for their State to coin its own currency, or are making trade in gold and silver lawful (as Utah just did), will have problems implementing such legislative promises until a system like the one that has been in existence for 92 years in North Dakota is created. North Dakota owns its own State Bank. Maybe that’s why, according to a recent Gallup poll, unemployment there is 3.8 percent and the job market is the best in the country (and the state’s population growth is up 5 percent). The jobless rate around the rest of the country has sky-rocketed and high-taxes in union-dominated States like New York, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio cause lost population.

“State Banks” is a tricky topic for even experienced bankers because the response often is: “We’ve had state-chartered banks in our state for a hundred years.” And, they have.

A State Bank and a state-chartered bank are quite different. The only State in this country that has a State-owned bank is North Dakota – and it has 92 years of successful experience. In the middle of one of the worst economic downturns in American history, the Bank of North Dakota in 2009 helped the State of North Dakota generate the largest budget surplus in that State’s history.

Because North Dakota owns its own banking system, it has been able to target-market its loan programs to fit the needs of local borrowers rather than being forced to abide by the “one size fits all” views of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and other federal regulators. It has also been able to maintain control over its real estate markets and escape much of the foreclosure treachery that seems so prevalent in the rest of America. Indeed, Bank of North Dakota (BND) doesn’t need the services of the FDIC because the State insures the funds of North Dakota depositors. Thus, when too big to jail banksters make stupid loans, the people of North Dakota don’t feel the pinch that results. They have their own State Deposit Insurance Corporation (SDIC). They have no need for the FDIC. Any independent bank that has been audited by the FDIC in the past two years understands the mischief these folks can create in an otherwise good, sound bank.

One of the primary advantages of a State Bank is that profits go to State Treasurers, not the federal government. The concept keeps taxpayers' money working within the State in which it is generated. Property taxes, state income taxes, sales taxes and all fees for services go to the State Bank. Right now, tax revenues from other States go into an account' held by the Bank of America which makes money off of our taxes. And I wouldn’t suggest that the Bank of America is the safest place for your money or mine.

Bank of North Dakota keeps the money inside that State and the profits – the Bank paid 30 percent of its income to the ND State Treasurer – help reduce tax burdens. The profits from the bank are returned to its shareholders: the people of the State of North Dakota.

How does a State Bank function?

Perhaps the simplest way to describe State Banks is to say they are a mini-Federal Reserve and a mini-FDIC. A State Bank can perform all of the same functions the Fed does: check clearing, monetary policy (for the State rather than the Nation), etc. At the moment, the Bank of North Dakota uses the Fed’s check clearing and other services. The point is, it doesn’t have to; it has alternatives.

Just as the Captains and the Kings of the federal financial world approve or deny bank charters across the nation, a State Bank approves or denies State Bank Charters. A State-owned bank doesn’t mean the State is running the banking system in lieu of independent banks. Quite the contrary is true. The State approves Bank Charters for the independent businessmen and women who run local banks in their communities. The State, not the federal government, audits the banks. The individual banks remain independent… they must comply with State laws just as banks in the other 49 states must comply with federal laws, but they are individually-owned, independent banks.

What happens to the big banks that are currently chartered to do business in States other than North Dakota?

The big banks keep doing business. They are merely chartered by the federal authorities, not the State authorities. A bank may not be chartered by both. A bank that carries the name “First National Bank” is, generally, going to be chartered by the feds. A bank that carries the name “First Colorado Bank” will likely be chartered by the State of Colorado.

And therein is a point of confusion. The State of Colorado currently charters independent state banks… as do most of the other 49 states. But, since the State of Colorado does not have a banking system owned by the State, the state-chartered banks must go to the federal government for check clearing, monetary policy, deposit insurance, etc. In other words, they are tied to the federal government because the feds are the only ones that make needed services available.

That, in turn, explains why the Federal Reserve System – which is a private corporation (a cartel, like OPEC), not a federal agency – holds so much power over how business and finance are conducted in this country. It also explains why, when State Sovereignty and State Currency legislation passes, these things cannot really be achieved – if the States passing such laws do not have a State Bank before they start printing or minting their new currency, or before they declare Sovereignty.

To have a successful new currency, regardless of whether it is gold and silver or paper printed by the State and backed by resources within the State, a distribution system must be in place. What do you carry with you when you go shopping? A one-ounce gold coin worth $1,400+ these days (and the cost of gold will increase as inflation does)? How does the local grocery store make change? How does a national bank suddenly begin dealing with payments that come to it in both federal government currency (the dollar) and State currency? The questions involving everyday financial behavior are an article in their own right.

The same is true of Sovereignty. Some States have passed legislation declaring their right to declare Sovereignty from the federal government. How can they become Sovereign when they don’t have a monetary distribution system in place that is independent of the federal government? Answer: They cannot.

This is an article about State Banks and not Sovereignty, but a few things need to be made clear. To declare Sovereignty, a State must declare they are Sovereign, AND be recognized by other nations and/or states as having sufficient power and wealth to be Sovereign. Without its own system of banking, how can your State be recognized by others as Sovereign? It cannot. It is impossible.

Legislators, it seems, think their State can declare Sovereignty and continue with day-to-day business as usual. The government (which they have rejected and seceded from) will continue to let that State use its currency? I don’t think so. The government will continue to provide banking services… to clear checks and insure bank deposits? I don’t think so.

What a State-owned bank does is provide alternatives. It provides profits to the taxpayers of the State. It controls inflation because it doesn’t have to tolerate New York’s or New Jersey’s or California’s – or Wisconsin’s – irresponsible over-spending (all of which become a part of national monetary policy via the national banking system).

Probably the best way to end America’s economic crisis is to have each State implement its own State Bank. It’s the only way to provide a distribution system that benefits citizens of individual States and not money center banks in New York City (or Charlotte, NC). It’s the best way to remove the authority of the Federal Reserve System – a private corporation that makes a profit from every dollar it “lends” the U.S. Treasury (and the ‘loans’ are usually the result of faulty economic decisions of the Federal Reserve System). It’s a non-violent, civil way of getting rid of the Fed… and those elected to office at the national level don’t seem to have the stomach for it.

The Federal Reserve is nothing but a wholesaler of American money – and I don’t mean wealth, I mean money. The people hurt most by Federal Reserve decisions are the middle class and the poor. We sure haven’t seen the Wall Street banksters suffering much, have we?

How is a State Bank funded? There is a way… the money is available via existing funds identified by experts in Certified Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs) published by every state… but that’s another article for another day. It would require no loans and definitely no dollars from taxation.

I do offer a word of caution.

The State Bank concept has already been identified by groups of socialists around the country as a means of giving the State the same power to commit fraudulent over-spending the federal government has enjoyed for so many years. These groups want to utilize State Banks to make “free loans” to cities and counties to build any project the cities, towns and counties want. They want to create a fiat currency like the one that has ruined our national economy. Quite simply, a “fiat currency” is one that has nothing backing it to give it value other than the federal or the State’s legal right to force taxpayers to pay for whatever amount they want to spend.

State Bank Charters must be carefully written to prevent such actions. If a State creates a paper currency, citizens must demand that the currency be backed by a commodity in which the State is rich – in Colorado, for example, uranium, oil shale, natural gas, etc.

And that, too, is another rather long article yet to be written on this subject. It’s complicated, but simple once understood. In my opinion, it is the strongest leverage Americans have to save their capitalist system and reject the slavery of socialism.

© 2011 Marilyn M. Barnewall - All Rights Reserved

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall began her career in 1956 as a journalist with the Wyoming Eagle in Cheyenne. During her 20 years (plus) as a banker and bank consultant, she wrote extensively for The American Banker, Bank Marketing Magazine, Trust Marketing Magazine, was U.S. Consulting Editor for Private Banker International (London/Dublin), and other major banking industry publications. She has written seven non-fiction books about banking and taught private banking at Colorado University for the American Bankers Association. She has authored seven banking books, one dog book, and two works of fiction (about banking, of course). She has served on numerous Boards in her community.

Barnewall is the former editor of The National Peace Officer Magazine and as a journalist has written guest editorials for the Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News and Newsweek, among others. On the Internet, she has written for News With Views, World Net Daily, Canada Free Press, Christian Business Daily, Business Reform, and others. She has been quoted in Time, Forbes, Wall Street Journal and other national and international publications. She can be found in Who's Who in America (2005-10), Who's Who of American Women (2006-10), Who's Who in Finance and Business (2006-10), and Who's Who in the World (2008).

Web site: http://marilynwrites@blogspot.com E-Mail: marilynmacg@juno.com

Beyond the Road Less Traveled

By Marilyn M. Barnewall
March 6, 2011
NewsWithViews.com

In 1978, M. Scott Peck’s book, The Road Less Traveled, led readers to the realization that delaying gratification – planning for pain to precede pleasure – helped create decent human beings. It was, perhaps, the only “decent way to live,” he said.

The Road Less Traveled stayed on the New York Times Best Seller list for 10 years… not 10 weeks or 10 months, but 10 years! If that does not speak of the hunger people have for understanding and the need to seek truth, I don’t know what does.

To evaluate the behavior of others, we must see beyond the obvious to the subtle, beyond what people say to what they do. That’s one of my sayings… I like to write sayings. It forces me to put my thoughts into short, understandable sentences.

One of Scott Peck’s other books is People of the Lie, (Simon and Schuster, 1983). The Road Less Traveled is a nice book. People of the Lie is not a nice book.

Who are people of the lie? If I had to describe them in a way other than Peck did, I would say, they are friendly sociopaths. They are people who lie to themselves about their lives, their faith, their beliefs, their achievements, their children, their parenting skills… just about anything significant. They rationalize ongoing bad results by convincing themselves their motives are pure. In case you don’t recognize this behavior, it is the basis for collectivism (or, as it is better known, communism and socialism) – the collective. Or, that sentence we so often hear, “it serves the greater good.” They live in dark places where the Light of Truth has never eased the night of their existence. They honestly do not recognize their rationalizations as lies. They live in synthetic, unreal worlds.

In People of the Lie, Peck defines evil as “malignant energy.” It is such a creatively honest definition of the word. Evil is a growing, negative, energy force... like cancer. And, like cancer, it is just as life-threatening. At this very moment, the life of America as a nation is threatened by People of the Lie.

To study anything, someone must make judgments and determine if an item fits the parameters of the research. We often hear that we should not judge others. Perhaps that’s why no one has ever done a scientific study of evil. Peck points out that “Christ told us ‘judge not lest ye be judged’.” When people make that comment, they take what Jesus really said out of context. It is the first defense people use against those with a Christian conscience. They quote the Bible with just a bit of a twist… from their perspective they simplify it (at least that’s what they say they do). Have you noticed how easily they do the same thing to our Constitution?

Christ went on to say: “Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam from thine own eyes; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote from thy brother’s eye.” In other words, we are to judge, but before we do so we are to honestly look within ourselves for the truth and at our own faults. We are to empty ourselves of our own prejudices to judge carefully.

It is fairly easy to look at abortion and determine it is evil… it involves human life and death. It is far more difficult to look at illegals pouring across our borders and see it for the evil it is. People seldom focus on a topic long enough to connect the dots between the number of Americans killed or raped by illegal aliens. They don’t connect the dots with our open border and the increased drug culture… a form of living torture that makes water boarding look like child’s play. Yes, Charlie Sheen really believes all of those grandiose things he says about himself. He lives in darkness but thinks he is the only one living in the light. People don’t connect the increased cost of hospital and medical care with the number of illegals who use emergency rooms like primary care physicians… or the number of people who may have died because doctors must stitch up a gang-related knife wound before getting to an elderly person’s heart attack.

The need to have government take care of you from cradle to grave is a disease that is made up of 1/3 inadequacy complex, 1/3 over-compensating ego for the inadequacy, with both leading to a sick need for the remaining 1/3: Power to fend off monsters under the bed.

M. Scott Peck is a psychiatrist – not my favorite professionals. I believe one learns nothing about positives by studying negatives (which is what most “mental health” experts do). In other words, I believe studying the mentally ill teaches us nothing about the mentally healthy. We learn about the mentally healthy by studying mentally healthy people! No one does that. I’m not sure we can even agree on who is mentally healthy, these days.

All of this leads to a question. It’s an important question.

How do those of us who choose to live our lives seeking the truth (rather than feel good answers to daily challenges) solve the problems created by those who prefer living around rather than through life? How do we solve the Charlie Sheen problem of those who live in synthetic worlds? Sheen’s behavior, at least, is caused by drugs… a form of mental illness, no doubt. Liberal and progressive behavior has no such excuse.

Yet, those who are Remnants are given the responsibility by God to try and save as many of the others as possible. It isn’t done by ignoring them – which conservatives have done the past 50 years (if you define the primary problem Tea Party Groups face, that’s it). If we hadn’t ignored them, they wouldn’t have gotten so much power.

We won’t solve the problems by condemning them. It’s our job to lift them up… make them better. Condemnation makes no one better. Judging someone and condemning them are two different things. Education is a possible solution… until one looks at teachers in Wisconsin getting their “Mary’s sick and can’t work” doctor excuses so they can protest having to pay their own way in life and relieve the burdens of middle class taxpayers who support their inability to teach anyone anything. If that weren’t a true statement, Wisconsin schools wouldn’t be rated 44th in the country.

We need to stop focusing on people and look instead at problem resolution. I would suggest that a lot of people focus on issues, but have no clue as to the base problem that needs to be solved. So priority #1 is to clearly define the problems.

In The Road Less Traveled and Beyond, Scott Peck defines the word “Kenosis.” The goal of the kenotic process is that of an empty vessel. His theory suggests the best way to define America’s problems is to empty ourselves of our preconceived notions of what this nation really is… to become Born Again Americans. To do that requires us to empty ourselves of our beliefs and visit the halls of history to get the facts.

What does the Constitution say? What does the Bill of Rights say? What do the words used in each document mean? It’s clear they gave us a Republic, not a Democracy. What’s the difference between the two? Do you know? If not, why not? Are you insulted every time someone calls America a ‘great democracy’? I am.

It’s past time for us to answer these questions. It’s past time to take satisfaction because we’re informed about our problems. It’s time to do something about them. It must be peaceful, lawful, and non-violent. It must be an exercise in American unity!

Here are four things, which, if implemented, would, I believe, initiate the solutions we need:

1. Implement State Banks. This removes the power base of the Federal Reserve which, it appears, is behind much of the evil in America, from wars to Wall Street. As long as states are tied to the federal financial system, they cannot declare sovereignty or create their own currency. They can legislate their right to do both, but cannot implement such legislation without the distribution provided by State Banks (not to be confused with state-chartered banks). Be sure any currency created is backed by a commodity of value and is not a fiat currency (with nothing supporting it but taxation of the people to repay government debt).

2. Remove at the ballot box Federal Statute Rule 6 (g), which puts the Grand Jury system in the hands of government. It is the intended fourth leg of government – the leg that gives Americans the right to call Grand Juries and present evidence without a judge or prosecutor controlling what is presented. If the people could call Grand Juries (as intended), elected officials would tread much more carefully before violating their Oath of Office. Legislators forced Rule 6 (g) on us. Put it on the garbage heap of history.

3. Make English the official language of your State. Missouri did. They have no illegal alien problem… no public assistance forms are printed in Spanish.

4. Become actively involved in candidate selection. Voting is important – provided the candidates for office are honest and informed. If they are committed to Party rather than People, it’s an exercise in destroying America.

These solutions don’t require huge demonstrations and protests. They require thoughtful groups of people who get together, study problems (rather than argue about issues), and get petitions that can change the balance of power signed and on the ballot.

We need to replace legislators who support Green jobs, open borders, Agenda 21’s sustainable development projects, and Wall Street brokerage houses. We can waste energy fighting anti-American issues… or, replace the people who support them with those who do not.

© 2011 Marilyn M. Barnewall - All Rights Reserved

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall began her career in 1956 as a journalist with the Wyoming Eagle in Cheyenne. During her 20 years (plus) as a banker and bank consultant, she wrote extensively for The American Banker, Bank Marketing Magazine, Trust Marketing Magazine, was U.S. Consulting Editor for Private Banker International (London/Dublin), and other major banking industry publications. She has written seven non-fiction books about banking and taught private banking at Colorado University for the American Bankers Association. She has authored seven banking books, one dog book, and two works of fiction (about banking, of course). She has served on numerous Boards in her community.

Barnewall is the former editor of The National Peace Officer Magazine and as a journalist has written guest editorials for the Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News and Newsweek, among others. On the Internet, she has written for News With Views, World Net Daily, Canada Free Press, Christian Business Daily, Business Reform, and others. She has been quoted in Time, Forbes, Wall Street Journal and other national and international publications. She can be found in Who's Who in America (2005-10), Who's Who of American Women (2006-10), Who's Who in Finance and Business (2006-10), and Who's Who in the World (2008). Web site: http://marilynwrites@blogspot.com E-Mail: marilynmacg@juno.com