Saturday, November 13, 2010


San Francisco, CA -- The City of San Francisco City Council has announced its intention today to ban everything. Councilmember and Vice Mayor Kevin Mullin proposed the ban, saying that everything has been allowed for too long, and "it's time to start over and not allow any of anything."

Mayor Gavin Newsome has voiced reluctant support for the idea. "I feel that everything is a pretty big step, but it's better than doing nothing. Someone needs to start the era of prevention."

By banning everything, the City hopes to put an end to frustrating and endless problems. Mr. Mullin claims that banning everything could lead to the end of pollution, emphysema, infant mortality and hang nails. "Our hope is to end these things through banning things that lead to stuff happening."

One thing not included in banning everything is taxes. "Oh no, we'll need more taxes to enforce the ban on everything," said Councilmember Pedro Gonzales, a big supporter of the overall ban on everything.

"This ban is going to require a lot of enforcement. For instance, law enforcement will be required to keep an eye on everything now, because everything is banned," Gonzales said. "If someone opens a Taco Bell restaurant, which is a part of everything, the police will be there to remind the owner that everything - including fast food restaurants - has been banned."

Councilmember Karyl Matsumoto agreed. "It's just become too time consuming to ban one thing at a time. First we ban Happy Meal toys, and then we ban circumcision - it all becomes so tiring." Ms. Matsumoto sighs. "You know, we can save the taxpayers a lot of time by banning everything all at once. Then we can get back to doing the people's business."

Ms. Matsumoto won't go unaffected by the all encompassing ban. With everything banned she has found out that odd spellings of traditional names are banned. "That's true, I'm a little upset but I feel that spelling my name 'Carol' is a small price to pay for the good of San Franciscans. I can live with it."

Homosexuals in San Francisco are relieved to have found a loophole. Since banning everything includes a ban on anti-homosexual sentiment and a ban on homosexual behavior, the city claims the ban on everything cancels out the ban on homosexuality. "Logically, you can't ban both - they offset each other. So homosexuality is not a part of everything," said Mr. Mullin.

Other things included in the ban on everything are candy, children, belches, pencil lead, tires, plastic, insulation, eye shadow, heat, pets, clothing stores, joking around, shaving, carnival rides and greeting cards. Problems likely to be prevented, according to the City Council, are death, injury, disease, unhappiness and divorce.

Story inspired by THIS ARTICLE

Sunday, November 7, 2010

• Economic 'Easing'

I sent this article, an excellent write up on Fed Chairman Bernanke's continued and now downright scary Quantitative Easing, to Michael Stollaire.

He was kind enough to forward the following to me. Enjoy...

Check out Jesse Ventura (former independent Minnesota Governor) and "Conspiracy Theory" on TruTV:

I watch it for the entertainment value, if anything, but check out the most recent episode about Wall Street, and the Rolling Stone article that's mentioned in it:

"Wall Street's Naked Swindle"

Between these two sources, you can see why The Fed has corrupted the American political system, and YES, I do agree that "Quantitative Easing" is simply an unsaid tax on the American people, as if $1 Trillion is printed, this means The Fed bought $1 Trillion in debt. Therefore, if $10 Trillion is in circulation, this created a 10% tax hike, and since The Fed is above the law, and outside the control of the US Government, the system of checks and balances created by The Founders, in order to protect We The People from thieves like Paulson, Geithner and Bernanke, etc. is completely avoided.

I believe that the most powerful person in the world is NOT The President of the USA, but instead THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE.

I would highly suggest watching the Zeitgeist films:

The stock market simply cannot grow in a linear fashion, and as such, it is necessary for "corrections" to transpire that purposefully decimate the market, meaning the DJIA, NASDAQ, etc. After Bear Stears went bankrupt, the DJIA went from 11000+ to around 6500 points, and now, we are back up to over 11000 points. Now, you can see how Wall Street just doubled-down on their money.

What do we do about it? We need representives in government positions that will crack down on Wall Street, instead of idiots like the Clintons who dismantle laws and regulations like Glass-Steagal (SP?) that prevent disasters like the housing bubble, and so forth.

Trump was on Fox and VanSusteren recently, saying the same thing, that we should not put up with price-fixing of OPEC, which would land Americans in federal prison, and China stealing our wealth, because we create bubbles, instead of MANUFACTURING EXCELLENT PRODUCTS. I really hate Trump, just like I think Ron Paul is a complete weirdo, but you can't argue with them about The Fed being poison, and what America needs to do to regain it's #1 economic status.

The truth is that we are only manufacturing "vapor paper" bubbles: the dot-com internet bubble, the housing bubble, and just wait until the $1.5 Quadrillion derivatives bubble bursts. Yes, that's $1,500,000,000,000,000 ~ a very big number, indeed. For America to survive, we need to manufacture and distribute TANGIBLE GOODS, and not rely on the technology sector to crank out more widgets like the iPad, etc.

Currently, we've got so much corruption in DC that when former Goldman employee, Paulson, says that he needs $800 Billion or America dies, they just do it, with no questions asked, no accountability, and the money just goes into the hands of bankrupt institutions like AIG, Goldman gets 100 cents on the dollar, and billions in bonuses are paid out. It's like playing roulette in Vegas, except you can bet on the double-zero all night, with no accountability, because the house pays you back every time you lose.

I think we've got a minimum of 3-4 election cycles that have to consecutively elect individuals like Rubio and Rand Paul for us to even have the slightest chance of recovery.

--Michael Stollaire