The Hidden Agenda

I know I owe a few folks a response re recent entries, but permit me to address another curiosity quickly, so I can take the duct tape off my head, thereby relieving the pressure. Forgive any hasty writing.

First, let me posit a starting point via Galloway of the Huffington Post called Pelosi's Hamfisted Turkey Move

Pelosi's Hamfisted Turkey Move

Posted October 16, 2007 | 10:26 AM (EST)

---

Despite howls of protest from Turkish officials, Nancy Pelosi seems intent on bringing to the floor a resolution condemning Armenian genocide nearly 100 years ago. The debasement and massacre of hundreds of thousands of people clearly merits attention.

But the timing of this resolution is a bit sub-optimal. Why target a genocide which occurred 100 years ago, and not offer a similar resolution against the Japanese for genocide that occurred in World War II, half a century ago? Could it possibly be related to the fact that nearly 70% of all air cargo destined to supply the troops in Iraq passes through Turkey, who thus far have been a reasonably reliable ally?

The Turkish government has indicated they might revoke our ability to send supplies, including new mine-resistant vehicles, if Pelosi follows through with her non-binding resolution. So why now? To complicate Bush's life? You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

Even Barney the Dinosaur could figure out that Pelosi is trying to be too clever by a half with the timing (not the content) of this resolution, and if Barney can, so can a good deal of the American public. I was once criticized on the Jon Stewart show for opining that Americans are smart enough to think for themselves. They are.

It's this type of tactical dissonance that has made Pelosi's first nine months such a rousing failure, if congressional approval polls are to be believed. The Democrats need a leader who plays chess, not hopscotch. Where's Francis Urquhart when you need him?

So, here we see the left is confused, as well as the right. Put aside the notion that the Constitution does not have any provision for legislative pontification, especially in foreign affairs, there is something else afoot.

Mr. Galloway figures that this move is some sort of anti-Bush, anti-success move thoroughly designed to piss off Turkey (the Ottoman Empire is long gone) into slicing the hamstring of our troops in Iraq (who are also on the verge of being in the front line against Iran). For this assertion to be true, one would have to grant unto Pelosi some subtle intelligence and depth of understanding of world cultures, something even Pelosi herself would not dare claim. Thus, there must be another answer.

Let us do what the left does and follow the money. Hedge funds and leverage speculators, such as George Soros, the man the Democrats rely on and Republicans fear, are heavily invested in seeing oil up, gold up, US dollar down. Recall Soros made his fortune by following and pushing the British pound downward. Here is an excerpt from a Soros NFP about his history:

In 1956, Soros immigrated to the United States. He worked as a trader and analyst until 1963. During this period, Soros adapted Popper's ideas to develop his own "theory of reflexivity," a set of ideas that seeks to explain the relationship between thought and reality, which he used to predict, among other things, the emergence of financial bubbles. Soros began to apply his theory to investing and concluded that he had more talent for trading than for philosophy. In 1967 he helped establish an offshore investment fund; and in 1973 he set up a private investment firm that eventually evolved into the Quantum Fund, one of the first hedge funds, through which he accumulated a vast fortune.

For the clever investor, one who sees bubbles and profits, it is an easy task, where one is without borders, wealthy, and powerful, to create bubbles for profit. To be honest, one should say the tendency to do that is well within our human nature. Few of us could resist such an easy way to make money. This would be true especially where one has a strong belief system, such as Soros' "open society," that can be fed by the profits generated from bubbles.

A quote from a Bank for International Settlement's white paper:

...The longest standing [concern] has been that hedge funds could contribute to macroeconomic crises by enabling the protracted build-up and rapid unwinding of asset price misalignments. The most readily available examples come from the foreign exchange market. Thus, George Soros’s Quantum fund was clearly implicated in the ERM crisis of 1992 (though many viewed this as a desirable equilibrating process), while hedge funds were repeatedly accused (but never convicted) of precipitating the Asian crisis. While we have seen fewer speculative attack episodes in recent years, thanks to the more widespread use of floating exchange rates, hedge funds do seem to have played a role in the tendency for the exchange rates and asset prices of smaller high yield countries to be buffeted by the waxing and waning of the carry trade. We can find evidence for this in the fact that the flow of money into certain styles of hedge funds (global macro and fixed income arbitrage) seems highly correlated with movements in Yen and Swiss franc interest rates.

When it was clear the "surge" was having a positive affect, oil and gold were settling downward in an orderly fashion, and the the U.S. sub-prime challenge was being absorbed without chaos, any vast investment in gold, oil, and against the U.S. dollar would be in jeopardy.

If you follow the "follow the money" theory, there are some interesting explanations about odd things that are afoot.

If Mr. Soros made a call to Nancy Pelosi saying it is really too bad the Turks have not been made to take responsibility for the clear genocide in 1915 period and suggest that his desire is some sort of statement as to what happened should come from Congress, Ms. Pelosi would comply, as her party, per the words of MoveOn.org, has been bought and paid for. [See Investor's Daily series on Soros' curious 2006 machinations HERE.]

Since Pelosi is fine with interfering with the Executive's exercise of its delegated foreign policy powers, like visiting Syria, giving all manner of aid and comfort to the terrorist state while grinning like an idiot, she would listen to her master's voice. [The picture above is from her visit - I didn't make up the bizarre grin.]

Sounds like a crazy conspiracy theory? The problem is, it is the only theory left.

Consider today 72% of NYer's are against Gov. Spitzer's weird decision to give away licenses to any claimant. I am still driving under a Vermont license because I could not get a NY one last year - I needed a picture ID to get a picture ID.

Under Spitzer's "steam roller" edict, he will eliminate the NY license as a valid ID for all citizens. It will no longer be valid to board a plane under the Homeland Security laws. (So, we all have to go and pay for a passport.)

How does this political animal give the finger to 72% of NYers in the middle of the mini-crisis involving his office's treatment of Senator Bruno? The same way both houses in Washington tried to sneak through the Immigration Bill, that we were all too stupid to have explained to us. You know, the one that gave amnesty to, what, 30,000,000 illegal aliens? [I always favor using numbers rather than words - they tell the real story ----- 30,000,000. California, itself, has a legit population of 37,000,000!]

There was a virtual revolution when word got out about the fast-tracked bill that both parties supported. Congress people, afterwards, told us that they did not do a good job explaining the bill which we morons did not understand because of "talk radio." (But Democrats don't listen to talk radio!) What was not to understand? Rather than explain the bill, they still assure us that is was a good compromise. Yeah, Bush and Peolsi agreeing eye to eye. I think I even heard the last-ditch, hack justification, "It is for the children!"

Had either party come out strongly against the bill and for securing the borders, their candidates would have had a ten year advantage in coming elections. We are talking about 80% of voters being viscerally upset at the bill, not discontent, but pissed and bewildered at the obvious instanity. Even before this fiasco, Congress' rating was nearing single digits. Still, they valiantly sailed the bill into the gale of anger. The question is still begging - why?

The Congress, then, changed course once they saw they may actually lose elections over it, regardless of party affiliation. Still, there was not peep of conciliatory language from either party or the President - they will be coming back to the issue in their tried and true incremental manner.

So, back to the premise - what is going on that politicians are doing weird things that enrage the vast majority of voters? Where is Congress now? Is it 8% approval rating? And, still, the inflammatory and dangerous Turkey vote is coming?

The answer to the apparent weirdness is that it is not weird at all, in light of some other game being played behind the scenes, one where voters are annoyances - like having borders, states, and a Constitution. Our opinion only matters insofar as emotions can be inflamed at election time.

For my money, things start to clarify when you extend the big money folks desire for a more efficient and controllable market, such as the European Union, which is why we have signed on, without a vote in Congress, to establishing the North American Union, a new currency, and a new Court above the Supreme Court. One more argument on this - the unions are being ignored by the Democrats! This makes little sense without a new agenda behind the scenes.

Our governments not only don't care about securing the borders, they are actively watering down the U.S. culture so that it blends into the mess of unsophisticated voters in Mexico who are living back in the 1930's regarding class warfare.

You see behind all of this a shimmer of Soros' "open society" where the ruling class does not have to concern itself with the petty politics of a republic, as they go about making money and fixing the rest of us.

Ultimately, however, you can't blame people with self interests for following their desires. Our government was founded on that principal (Federalist Paper #10). So, who do we blame? The fault is not in our stars but in ourselves; we need to stop voting like drug addicts fawning over the pusher and vote for our national and personal survival.

We need to create a "none of the above" alternative and, as the motto Governor Dean stole from the last remnants of native Vermonters, who aimed it at him, the rich kid from Long Island, "Take Back America."

I don't see how we can trust any of the crowd in D.C. Mostly, of course, they are good-natured goof balls, superficial do-gooders, and old-fashioned power mongers, but they have in common the ability to do what they are told by leaders who are transmitting orders from elsewhere.

The other common trait is a skill at avoiding reflection, study, and honor. But, like I say, we put them in office, so you can't blame them for being dolts. They are what they are. It was Benjamin Franklin who answered a Mrs. Powel's question about what sort of government the convention had given "us." His reply, "A republic, if you can keep it."