[chuckles]

The constitutional reference would be the part where "CONGRESS" prints the money and "SETS THE VALUE THEREOF". This has always been the misunderstod buggaboo since the begining. I believe this was the cause of Hamilton and Burr's duel. The central bank is unconstitutional, but has almost always been there. The tinfoil hat people have argued this forever. There is a book about Jekel Island(sp?), or somesuch that explains it all. I don't see why Allen Greenspan should control the economy of the greatest super power, and thus the world, but try to imagine congress setting interest rates and the value of money. Barney Frank, Kennedy, the Vermont's "independant",Nancy Pelosi,et al.... the mind boggles.

Some believe Lincoln was killed, not because of a lone gunman from the south wanted revenge, but because he was the first president to try to pay for a war with "congressional money". The bankers were all set to finance both the North and the South, when Abe decided the rates were too high. So, he printed his own money called "Greenbacks". Thats where the term comes from. When he was killed, Johnson stopped the printing of the Greenbacks and borrowed the money like he was suposed to, from the central banks. Another was, Kennedy was printing money when he was shot, and Johnson stopped that toot sweet post mortem. A good, but tedious read about this is "The Unseen Hand, A conspiritorial hisory of the world." It gives the "Big Picture" of world history. One of the best reads in my library is a book written by a Democrat Rep from Ill. in 1940. He wittnessed the FDR debacle from congress and wrote about it. The book is "Smoke Screen" by Samuell B. Pettengill. He compares FDR with what went on in Hitler's Germany. He speaks of the "stacking of the courts" because FDR had to fight even his own party to get his radical ideas through. He compares the CCC,NRA, and all the other alphabet soup titles with the 3rd Reich. This has always been one of my quirks. When people talk of Hitler, they speak of "right wing" this and "conservative" that, when in fact, Hitler was a socialist. NAZI even means National Socialist party in english, but somehow that is missed by Democrats. Remember Volkswagon, the peoples car? Goverment takeovers of industrial production is not conservative, it is the 1st step in socialization. Maybe Ann Coulter will write about that someday and clear it all up. When I call Democrats socialists and communists, it's not hyperbole.

I'm not saying I believe everything I read, but there are many facets to history that are not discussed. A good comparison, I think, is of the "magician". He gets you to look at his left hand, while his right is in your pocket. The media, pundits, and talking heads, get you involved in one subject, while all the time, setting you up for the fall. I don't trust anybody.

[biblewonk]

Thanks for a very very interesting post. It deserves a better response than this but I can only say for now that I agree 100 percent about Hitler being a socialist. He wanted to empower the people against the evil wealthy people, the Jews and the profiteers. Anyone who would make a profit was hurting the state and therefore a traitor.

The money thing about Lincoln and Kennedy is very interesting. The thing about government is that all of the successful ones strive to strengthen the nation. There is no way to be a government who sits around on philosophical ideas while enemies are all around. A nation can not exist in this world without being strong economically and governments are all about self preservation. People who say the constitution doesn't allow the government to do such and such drive me nuts.