Bernanke calls Ron Paul remarks "bizarre" - Congressman Paul responds on Congressional Record with letter from Professor Robert D. Auerbach

posted by Greg Chamberlain



Last week on February 24, 2010 when Congressman Paul addressed Fed Chair Ben Bernanke at the House Financial Services Committee hearing, Congressman Paul made the following comments relating to The Federal Reserve Transparency Act, which has passed in the house:

"I would like to get to more specifics on the transparency bill because it has been reported in the past that in the 1980's that The Fed actually had facilitated a $5.5 billion dollar loan to Saddam Hussein and he then bought weapons from our military industrial complex and also that is when he invested in a nuclear reactor. A lot of cash was passed through and a lot of people suppose it was passed through the Federal Reserved when there was a Provisional Government Act in the 2003 invasion. That money was not appropriated by the Congress as the Constitution says"

"Also, there has been reports that the cash used in the Watergate Scandal came through the Federal Reserve. And, when investigators back in those years tried to find out, they were always stonewalled and we couldn't get the information."

When Congressman Paul finished other additional comments, Ben Bernanke replied:

"Well, Congressman, I, the specific allegations you have made, I think are absolutely bizarre and I have absolutely no knowledge of anything remotely like what you just described."

The next day on February 25, 2010, in response to Bernanke's comments, Congressman Paul entered a statement into the Congressional Record that is just below:.
================================================
Statement entered into the congressional record by Ron Paul, 2/25/10

Madame Speaker, I would like to enter into the record the following letter from Professor Robert D. Auerbach, a professor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas. This letter provides additional information regarding remarks I made at yesterday's Financial Services Committee Humphrey-Hawkins hearing, remarks which Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke categorized as "bizarre."

Thank you Congressman Ron Paul for bringing these important facts to the public's attention

I thank Congressman Ron Paul for bringing to the public's attention the Federal Reserve coverup of the source of the Watergate burglars' source of funding and the defective audit by the Federal Reserve of the bank that transferred $5.5 billion from the U.S. government to Saddam Hussein in the 1980s. Congressman Paul directed these comments to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke at the House Financial Services Hearing February 24, 2010. I question Chairman Bernanke's dismissive response.

BERNANKE: "Well, Congressman, these specific allegations you've made I think are absolutely bizarre, and I have absolutely no knowledge of anything remotely like what you just described."

The evidence Congressman Ron Paul mentioned is well documented in my recent book, Deception and Abuse at the Fed (University of Texas Press: 2008). The head of the Federal Reserve bureaucracy should become familiar with its dismal practices.

First, consider the Fed's coverup of the source of the $6300 in hundred dollar bills found on the Watergate burglars when they were arrested at approximately 2:30 A.M. on June 17, 1972 after they had broken into the Watergate offices of the Democratic Party. Five days after the break-in, June 22, 1972, at a board of directors' meeting of officials at the Philadelphia Fed Bank, it was recorded in the minutes [shown on page 23 of my book] that false or misleading information had been provided to a reporter from the Washington Post about the $6,300. Bob Woodward told me he thought he was the Washington Post reporter who had made the phone inquiry. The reporter "had called to verify a rumor that these bills were stolen from this Bank" according to the Philadelphia Fed minutes. The Philadelphia Fed Bank had informed the Board on June 20 that the notes were "shipped from the Reserve Bank to Girard Trust Company in Philadelphia on April 3, 1972." The Washington Post was incorrectly informed of "thefts but told they involved old bills that were ready for destruction."

The Federal Reserve under the chairmanship of Author Burns not only kept the Fed from getting entangled in the Watergate coverup, which the Fed's actions had assisted, it allowed false statements about bills the Fed knew were issued by the Philadelphia Fed Bank to stand uncorrected. Blocking information from the Senate and House Banking Committees [letters shown in my book, Chapter 2] and issuing false information during a perilous government crisis imposed huge costs on the public that had insufficient information to hold the Fed officials accountable for what they had withheld from the Congress. Had the deception been discovered the Fed chairmen following Burns may have been forced to rapidly implement some real transparency to restore the Fed's credibility. That would have reduced or eliminated many of the lies, deceptions, and corrupt practices that are described in my book.

The second subject brought up by Congressman Ron Paul is the exposure of faulty examinations of the Federal Reserve of a foreign bank in Atlanta, Georgia through which $5.5 billion was sent to Saddam Hussein that a Federal Judge found to be part of United States active support for Iraq in the 1980s.

On November 9, 1993, several federal marshals brought a prisoner, Christopher Drogoul, into my office at the Rayburn House Office Building of the U.S. House of Representatives. The marshals removed the manacles. Drogoul took off his jump suit and changed into a shirt, tie, and business suit. He immediately looked like the manager of the Atlanta agency with domestic headquarters in New York City of Banca Nazionale. Drogoul had come to testify about a "scheme prosecutors said he masterminded that funneled $5.5 billion in loans to Iraq's Hussein through BNL's Atlanta operation. Some of the loans allegedly were used to build up Iraq's military and nuclear arsenals in the years preceding the first Gulf War." 1

Drogoul's "'off book' BNL-Atlanta funding to Iraq began in 1986 as financing for products under Department of Agriculture programs."2 The loans allegedly had been authorized by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Since Drogoul told the committee he was merely a tool in an ambitious scheme by the United States, Italy, Britain and Germany to secretly arm Iraq in their 1980-88 war, the testimony was politically contentious and unproven. He was sentenced in November 1993 to 37 months in prison and he had already served 20 months awaiting his sentencing hearing.

U.S. District Judge Ernest Tidwell found that the United States had actively supported Iraq in the 1980s by providing it with government-guaranteed loans even though it wasn't creditworthy. The judge said such policies "clearly facilitated criminal conduct."3

Gonzalez was drawn to Drogoul's answer about the Fed examiner who had visited his Atlanta operation. Gonzalez said that:

"At the November 9, 1993 Banking Committee hearing I asked Christopher Drogoul, the convicted official of the Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro agency branch in Atlanta, Georgia, how the Federal Reserve Bank examiners could miss billions of dollars of illegal loans, most of which ended up in the hands of Hussein.

Mr. Drogoul stated:

The task of the Fed [bank examiner] was simply to confirm that the State of Georgia audit revealed no major problems. And thus, their audit of BNL usually consisted of a one or two-day review of the state of Georgia's preliminary results, followed by a cup of espresso in the manager's office."

Gonzalez was appalled at the of lack of effective examination of a little storefront bank and also appalled by the gifts exchanged by officers of the New York Federal Reserve and the regulated banks in New York City where the main U.S. office of BNL was located. A description of what followed is in my book.

The Fed voted in 1995 to destroy the source transcripts of its policy making committee that had been sent to National Archives and Records Administration. Chairman Alan Greenspan had the committee vote on this destruction, telling the members: "I am not going to record these votes because we do not have to. There is no legal requirement." (p. 104 in my book.) Greenspan thus removed any fingerprints on this act of record destruction. Donald Kohn, who is now Vice Chairman of the Board of Governors at the Federal Reserve, answered some questions I had sent to Chairman Greenspan about this destruction. Kohn replied in a letter on November 1, 2001 to me at the University of Texas that they had destroyed the source records for 1994, 1995 and 1996, they did not believe it to be illegal and there was no plan to end this practice. That is one reason why the Federal Reserve audit supported by Congressman Ron Paul is needed. The Fed must stop destroying its records.

Robert Auerbach is Professor of Public Affairs at the Lyndon Baines Johnson School of Public Affairs, The University of Texas at Austin. He was an economist with the House of Representatives Financial Services Committee during the tenure of four Federal Reserve Chairmen: Arthur Burns, William Miller, Paul Volcker, and Alan Greenspan. Auerbach also served as an economist in the U.S. Treasury's Office of Domestic Monetary Affairs during the first year of the Ronald Reagan administration and as a financial economist with the U.S. Federal Reserve System. Auerbach has been a professor of economics at the American University in Washington, D.C. (1976-83), and a professor of economics and finance at the University of California-Riverside (1983-93). He has written numerous articles, and two textbooks in banking and financial markets. He received two Masters degrees in economics, one from the University of Chicago and one from Roosevelt University, where he studied under Abba Lerner, and a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Chicago, where he studied under Milton Friedman.

1 Marcy Gordon, "Banker Imprisoned in BNL Case Tells Story to House Committee," The Associated Press, November 9, 1993.

2 U.S. Newswire: "Former Executive of Atlanta Agency of Italian-Owned Bank Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy", from U.S. Department of Justice, Public Affairs, June 2, 1992.

3 Peter Mantius, "Drogoul given 37 months Judge in BNL case also blasts actions of U.S. prosecutors," The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, December 10, 1993, Section A, p. 12.
=======================================
Congressman Paul's official congressional website is www.House.Gov/Paul and his very active official MySpace page is www.MySpace.Com/RonPaul

Congressman Ron Paul questions Secretary Clinton about The Cost of Our Foreign Operations

On Thursday February 25, 2010, U.S. Congressman Ron Paul of Texas' 14th district questioned Secretary of State Hillary Clinton about spending at the State Department during her appearance before the House Foreign Affairs Committee.



Congressman Paul's official congressional website is www.House.Gov/Paul and his very active official MySpace page is www.MySpace.Com/RonPaul

Ron Paul's statement on an atrocious U.S. policy of domestic assasination of U.S. citizens.

On Wednesday February 24, 2010, U.S. Congressman Ron Paul of the 14th District of Texas took to the House floor to challenge assassinating American citizens at the government's discretion.



Congressman Paul's official congressional website is www.House.Gov/Paul and his very active official MySpace page is www.MySpace.Com/RonPaul

Ron Paul's Opening Statement at House Financial Services Committee Hearing February 24, 2010 - Addressing Fed Chair Bernanke

ThePresident.Com

The House Financial Services Committee held a hearing named "Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy" on February 24, 2010.

The entire hearing can be seen at http://c-span.org/Watch/Media/2010/02/24/HP/R/29906/Fed+Chair+Answering+Lawmakers+On+Direction+Of+Economy.aspx

Below is Congressman Paul's Opening Statement addressing Fed Chair Ben Bernanke. Ron Paul spoke about what he calls the moral hazard from a situation that the government artificially created in what should be the free market, but is not.

In watching the rest of the opening statements and questioning of Fed Chair Bernanke from other members of Congress, I got the feeling that Ron Paul is the only person who understands the root causes of the economic problems this nation faces and he has the most sure solutions. However, most of the others asked Bernanke meek surface questions that lacked depth, and showed how ill equipped Congress is to deal with or to monitor the Fed's Monetary Policy, regardless of philosophy.

On philosophy, Ron Paul is simply promoting that we as a nation drop the Keynesian philosophy and adopt the Austrian School of Economics way, for it is by far the most efficient way of allowing true free markets to exist, reduce the size and scope of government and keep competition in business free and equitable, rather than crony capitalistic.

Greg Chamberlain
=================
Ron Paul's Opening Statement at House Financial Services Committee Hearing February 24, 2010 - Addressing Fed Chair Bernanke



Part I




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVEwsIIF6wEv


Part II



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBGfJOA518o


Congressman Paul's official congressional website is www.House.Gov/Paul and his very active official MySpace page is www.MySpace.Com/RonPaul

Medical costs can be cut with freedom - Allowing consumers access to MSAs will improve health care - By Ron Paul

Congressman Paul wrote this piece on December 14, 1998 for what he calls Texas Straight Talk, a weekly column that he also reads aloud for listeners to hear by calling a toll free phone number. The text is always made available at his Congressional website.

His message never changes. "Freedom", as he often says, "is popular". As one reads this important column on health care and medical costs written in 1998 and compares it to what the Congressman says today as the Health Care debate continues, one finds that the Congressman practices (votes in the house) what he preaches and that what he preaches does not change with the breeze. The gist I always get... less government intervention and no corporatist collusion between special interests and Washington will mean the free market will lower health care prices for consumers.

Greg Chamberlain
==============
Medical costs can be cut with freedom - Allowing consumers access to MSAs will improve health care
by United States Congressman Ron Paul of Texas' 14th District



An often-made claim is that it is expensive to be sick in America.

That may be true, though no more so than any of the more socialist systems in the world perceived as "inexpensive" by those desiring similar government programs here. In those nations, the cost is hidden in individual tax-rates in excess of fifty percent, so the extremely high costs for care are still being paid by the patient, they just don't write the check to the doctor, they write it to the tax collector.

The reality is that for Americans major expense is not in major illnesses (insurance bears most of the brunt in typical cases), but in routine care.

For many years, the federal government has taken an ever-expanding role in our nation's medical care through regulatory and legislative activism. Of course, to oppose federal involvement is to be "anti-health care" or "anti-patient." Never mind that routine health care is arguably less efficient and less accessible than in our recent past, with sick people receiving worse care at higher costs.

What the politicians and their bureaucrats refuse to acknowledge is that the cost of routine health care is spiraling out of control precisely because of the federal involvement.

Most obviously, there is the direct government meddling. Bureaucrats, under authority granted to them by years of irresponsible congressional action, now dictate how medical care is to be offered, in what timetables, quantities and situations. Of course, these directives have nothing to do with the realities of medicine or even the demands of the market, but are simply political directives issued for soundbite effectiveness. While sounding nice, these regulations increase costs by forcing the medical provider to expend greater resources to meet the regulations.

Resources once devoted to assisting patients with their needs must be diverted to meeting bureaucratic regulations. Federal regulations imposed on state governments regarding medical care delivery, or on insurance providers, or employers, or directly on doctors and hospitals, all eventually come back to the consumer in the form of higher checkout costs.

To deal with the ever-rising costs, consumers feel forced to relinquish more control to insurance companies and health maintenance organizations (HMOs). At the same time, doctors are forced into the systems so that the burden of regulatory paperwork can be lifted from them.

The insurers and HMOs only make matters worse by further restricting the consumer's choices and limiting the services a physician in their group can offer. The incentive to cut costs is lost, as physicians (now working essentially as low-level employees) seek to make as much as they can in the new corporate environment, will charge the maximum the HMOs allow.

Consumer complaints about insurers and HMOs compel politicians to write new laws and more regulations to curry voter favor. More regulations breed more costs, limiting more choices, causing more anguish, and the cycle continues.

There are several ways to break the cycle. The most obvious solution is to pull the plug on federal intervention. That, however, is tantamount to political suicide. Who wants to be depicted as wanting to stop "good" regulations and laws, and "hurt" patients?

A more viable solution is to let the consumer and his doctors pull themselves out of the system, by means of medical savings accounts. While this does not solve the entire problem, it provides a larger degree of freedom for those who desire it.

Under an MSA system, a consumer could save pre-tax dollars in a special account. Those dollars would be used to pay for health care expenses, with the patient negotiating directly with the physician of their choice for the care they choose without regard to HMO rules or a bureaucrat's decision. The incentive for the physician is getting paid in cash as the service is rendered, rather than waiting months for an HMO or insurance provider's billing cycle.

With the cash for the MSAs coming from pre-tax dollars, most Americans could afford deposits that would cover routine expenses families' experience in a year. To cover larger expenses, major-medical insurance policies are readily available and fairly inexpensive.

Medical care will always be expensive, regardless of the system. The real question is how much freedom will a patient have in determining the care they receive. It is only when the patient controls the purse strings of his own money that he will have that freedom.

Congressman Paul's official congressional website is www.House.Gov/Paul and his very active official MySpace page is www.MySpace.Com/RonPaul

Government Stimulus, One Year Later - by U.S. Congressman Ron Paul of Texas

Congressman Ron Paul, when one takes a look at his voting record, has long been the quintesential Mr. Smith citizen politician in Wasington DC who has consistently been warning about the danger of big government and how big government is not the answer or the solution in terms of a "good" economy or important issues such as health care or education. In fact, Congressman Paul has pointed out over and over again that big government is the problem, especially given the fact that corporatism, also known as Crony Capitalism, reigns over politicians actually working for we, the people.

Below, is Congressman Paul's latest weekly column entitled Government Stimulus, One Year Later.

Regards,
Greg Chamberlain
================
Government Stimulus, One Year Later
by United States Congressman Ron Paul
www.house.gov/paul

Last week marked the one year anniversary of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, or the stimulus bill, passing into law. While the debate over its success has been focused on whether or not it is stimulating the economy and on various questionable uses of funds, in my estimation this legislation is accomplishing exactly what it was intended to accomplish – grow the government.

Those of us concerned about the ever increasing level of government debt gasped at the astonishing $787 billion cost estimates for this bill. True to form it has actually cost 10 percent more at $862 billion. We heard over and over that government could not sit around and do nothing while people lost their jobs and houses. The administration claimed that unemployment would not go above 8 percent if the stimulus bill passed. Now, a year later, the government estimates that unemployment is over 10 percent. The real number is closer to 20 percent. It appears that those promises were total fabrications in order to close the deal.

In any case, the American people know that more government spending obviously equals more government. If the goal was to strengthen the private sector, Congress would have allowed businesses and individuals to keep more of their own money through meaningful tax cuts. Outrageously, the administration claims that they did “cut taxes” by reducing withholding, and that they have stimulated the private economy by increasing the amount of money in every worker’s paycheck. What they fail to mention is they did not change the total amount of taxes due. This means that all that money not withheld from paychecks will add up to a big unpleasant surprise when returns are filed this year. Many tax preparers are already seeing shocked taxpayers having to come up with big checks to the government when they normally expect a refund. Stimulus, indeed!

The administration also claims that thousands of jobs have been created or saved by this massive spending bill, but these are just more government jobs, and counterproductive in the long run. Funding for the public sector necessarily comes at the expense of an overtaxed private economy. But, it makes sense that government would seek to expand its payroll since every new bureaucrat becomes a likely advocate for big government, when an increasing number of Americans are demanding the opposite. But the more the burden, the closer the government parasite comes to killing its host.

Rather than learning the lessons of the past year, the administration is moving full-speed ahead to do even more economic damage. With the stimulus bill set as a precedent and victory declared, another “jobs” bill is in the works. And, in order to address the unavoidable issues of our massive deficit, the administration has named a bi-partisan commission to find ways to decrease it. Tax increases on the middle class are notoriously back “on the table”, exposing that campaign promise as another instance of merely saying what the people wanted to hear. If the obvious solution to our spending problems was seriously put forth, that is, getting back to the constitutional limitations of government, I would be shocked. More likely, this will be a tactic to increase taxes and spending in a way that passes the political buck.

Congressman Paul was a presidential candidate in the 2008 Presidential Election. Most recently, he won the CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) Presidential Straw Poll by a wide margin, far ahead of Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin.

Congressman Paul's official congressional website is www.House.Gov/Paul and his very active official MySpace page is www.MySpace.Com/RonPaul

Ron Paul speaks at CPAC - Ron Paul speech at CPAC - Stop the Wars, End the Fed, Regain our Liberties!

Ron Paul spoke at CPAC. His message was to stop preventive and undeclared wars, return to sound monetary policies, and promote freedom in all areas of your life, was the message of Ron Paul's annual CPAC address.

Ron Paul supporters know, he is America's leading voice for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies.

Part I



Part II



Part III

Video: Ron Paul in Texas '14th district 2010 Congressional Election Debate

Part I




Part II

Ron Paul: The Market Should Set Interest Rates!

Allow The Free Market, Not The Fed, To Set Interest Rates

In his latest appearance on CNBC, U.S. Congressman Ron Paul of Texas explains to 'In Fed We Trust' author and Bernanke apologist David Wessel why we should end the Federal Reserve's power to set interest rates and engage in central economic planning. Wessel concedes that the Fed has been too secretive for its own good and has become the victim of public anger against bank bailouts. He goes on to perpetuate the myth that we live in a 'capitalist democracy' and that such an organization needs an 'independent' central bank. Ron Paul counters that the system is already thoroughly politicized and that we don't have true capitalism, but crony capitalism and economic interventionism.

Ron Paul wins prestigeous CPAC Presidential Staw Poll at Conservative Political Action Conference

CPAC is the Conservative Political Action Conference. U.S. Congressman Ron Paul of Texas won Presidential Straw Poll, defeating Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin. Romney was the winner of the last CPAC Presidential Straw Polls.

One journalist said Ron Paul Rocks CPAC: http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/19/ron-paul-rocks-cpac/?test=latestnews

See Fox News interview following the straw poll win: http://video.foxnews.com/v/4027415/ron-paul-wins-cpac-straw-poll?category_id=86858

On Friday, February 19, 2010, Congressman Paul spoke to CPAC's main audience about recapturing the passion for the entire message of liberty.

Competition and Health Care

Reporter John Stossel recently took a look at how certificate of need laws stifle competition and help contribute to higher health care costs.

Are US Taxpayers Bailing Out Greece? - Essay by United States Congressman Ron Paul

Are US Taxpayers Bailing Out Greece? -
Essay by United States Congressman Ron Paul

Last week we were reminded that ours is not the only country suffering from severe economic turmoil. The Greek government is the latest to come close to default on their massive public debt. Greece has insufficient funds in their treasury to make even the minimum payments that are now coming due. Their debt level is about 120 percent of their gross domestic product and their public sector absorbs what amounts to 40 percent of GDP. Any talk of cutting costs and spending is met with violent protests from the many Greeks heavily dependent on government payments. Mounting fears of default have sent shockwaves through their creditors and all of the eurozone countries.

But there have been statements made by the European Central Bank to calm fears and give assurances that Greece will get the aid it needs. Details of agreements are not forthcoming.

Is it possible that our Federal Reserve has had some hand in bailing out Greece? The fact is, we don’t know, and current laws exempt agreements between the Fed and foreign central banks from disclosure or audit.

Greece is only the latest in a series of countries that have faced this type of crisis in recent memory. Not too long ago the same types of fears were mounting about Dubai, and before that, Iceland. Several other countries (Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Latvia) are approaching crisis levels with public debt as well. Many have strong ties to Goldman Sachs and the case could easily be made that default could have serious implications for big US banking cartels. Considering the ties between the Fed and these big banks, it is not outlandish to wonder if the US taxpayer is secretly bailing out the entire world, country by country, even as our real unemployment tops 20 percent. Unless laws are changed to allow a complete and meaningful audit of the Federal Reserve, including its agreements with foreign central banks, we might never know if this is occurring or not.

This global financial crisis is a predictable result of secretive central banking and unsound fiat currency. Governments are entirely committed to this system of fiat money and fractional reserve banking for obvious reasons: it enables them to do what they love most, namely, spend hoards of money with near impunity. Without the limitations of sound money, governments will spend without limit. They will spend money to hire their cronies, pay off special interests, give out favors, create dependence and generally distract from the terrible job they do at their chief mandate, which is to protect the liberties of the people. Fiat money is a blank check to government, which is very dangerous, and we are witnessing the death throes of the system as the bills come due and the underlying capital is squandered away.

Because of our globe-straddling empire and lingering reserve currency status, perhaps no one has a more vested interest in keeping this system cobbled together than our own government and the Federal Reserve. The agreements that Iceland and Dubai and Greece have negotiated can amount to little more than kicking the can down the road, as their overall spending habits remain largely intact, fiat currencies are still legal tender and more debt is issued on top of unsustainable debt. The American people have the right to know if they are going to be the ones holding the bag in the end because the Federal Reserve secretly put them on the hook for it. This knowledge would be a key factor in peacefully dismantling this immoral and unconstitutional system.

REPUBLIC VERSUS DEMOCRACY - Speech by Ron Paul in January 2003

It is a fact that the Founders set out to establish a Republic, and strongly warned against Democracies. Somehow, that fact was glossed over in what I was taught as a youth.

This is perhaps why this is one of the most important Ron Paul speeches, ever, to me and perhaps to many others.

For the Ron Paul Revolution to advance with even more depth vs. the blind support that other politicians get, the concepts in this video must be spread by our movement as part of the message to the blind.

Greg Chamberlain
=============================================
REPUBLIC VERSUS DEMOCRACY - Speech by Ron Paul in January 2003

Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, at the close of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Benjamin Franklin told an inquisitive citizen that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention gave the people a Republic, if you can keep it. We should now apologize to Mr. Franklin. It is obvious that the Republic is gone, and we are wallowing in a pure democracy against which the Founders had strongly warned.

Madison, the Father of the Constitution, could not have been more explicit in his fear and concern for democracies. "Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contentions, have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property, and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.''

for the rest on Video, please go to: http://www.c-spanvideo.org/congress/?q=node/77531&appid=596101578