the united american party

Happy Easter and Other Misinformation From the Radical Evangelical Right

The Restored Church of God

Great site! Learned a lot! Thought I would share.

Got there from here, Dances With Fruit Flies. Good article, but all wrong! Evolution; Facts, Fallacys and Implications explains why.

In the article, Dances With Fruit Flies, from USA News, it states that "some 55 percent of Americans balk at the idea that humans evolved at all." How accurate do you think this statement is? And why might this be? These are the first two questions that popped into my head. So, off I went in search of clues that might lead to what I am going to call the "dumbification" of America.

First stop, The Christian Broadcasting Network. CBN is the broadcaster responsible for the 700 Club that boasts a viewership of approximately 1.5 billion people worldwide.

Seen in 95 percent of the television markets across the United States, the program is carried on ABC Family Channel cable network, FamilyNet, Trinity Broadcasting Network, and numerous U.S. television stations, and is seen daily by approximately one million viewers. CBN WorldReach broadcasts, which include the international edition of The 700 Club, have been translated into more than 70 foreign languages, can be seen in more than 200 countries, and are accessible throughout the year by more than 1.5 billion people around the world.

Very impressive numbers to say the least. This is what CBN, Pat Robertson and Dr. Jonathan Wells had to say about evolution,

Wells evaluated ten major textbooks on seven examples of evolution. Out of the seventy total grades, the books earned 25 Ds, but mostly Fs — 40 of them to be exact. In other words, all the books flunked the truth test.

For example, the books discuss an old experiment supposedly showing how chemicals came together to begin life. They won't admit the presence of oxygen in the early atmosphere because oxygen would prevent evolution from even getting off the ground.

This wouldn't have anything to do with outdated textbooks in the classroom, would it? Or the strain that the No Child Left Behind Act puts on local budgets? Or is it that schools are delaying the ordering of new textbooks, materials and supplies because President Bush wanted to cut even more money from the education budget? Maybe. But lucky for us the G.O.P. moderates in Congress came through and voted to add back the $5.4 billion that President Bush would have liked to have seen slashed from the federal budget this year.

With outdated textbooks, budget cuts and an outright attack on education from the radical right, coupled with faith-based community leaders teaching our children to ignore evolution it's no wonder 55% of Americans today are dumbing down.

Next stop, Focus On the Family. All aboard!!! The train to stupidity is leaving exactly when the big hand hits twelve and the little hand hits eight (for those of you that have a Casio digital watch). 

Focus On the Family states that their newsletter reaches some 2.6 million readers, give or take a few thousand lost souls with a ton of baggage.

Worldwide, Focus on the Family is broadcasting in 25 languages on over 8,300 radio facilities heard in 164 countries.

Dr. Dobson's commentaries are heard by more than 200 million people by way of radio every day, including a program translation carried on state-owned radio stations in the Republic of China. He is seen on 80 television stations daily in the U.S.

This is what James C. Dobson and Mark Hartwig have to say about evolution,

Now we’re in a position to give a broader description of specified complexity: Specified complexity is displayed by any object or event that has an extremely low probability of occurring by chance, and matches a discernible pattern. According to contemporary design theory, the presence of highly specified complexity is an indicator of an intelligent cause.

I guess "random" isn't as random as it used to be. Strike it from the dictionary and tell Random House to change their name to Specified Complexity House. This is hardly what I call candidates for Faith-Based Initiatives here in America.

The Administration has eliminated regulatory and policy barriers that have kept faith-based organizations from partnering with the Federal government to help Americans in need. It has also worked to put into place regulations to ensure that faith-based organizations are able to compete on an equal footing for Federal funding within constitutional guidelines, without impairing the religious character of such organizations and without diminishing the religious freedom of beneficiaries.

James Dobson holds a doctorate from the University of Southern California (1967) in the field of child development and is a licensed psychologist in California. These are hardly qualifications for debunking the theory of evolution.

Mark Hartwig has a doctorate in educational psychology from the University of California, Santa Barbara. Active in the origins debate since 1985, he was one of the early organizers of the intelligent-design movement. These are exactly the qualifications needed to manipulate and intimidate the minds of America's youth.

I have to admit Einstein and Darwin have nothing on these guys. Two psychologists from California influencing millions of people every day is just what we need to further the intelligence of our youth in this great nation of ours.

The Nazi propaganda machine of the 1930s and 1940s had about as much education as these two guys and they were able to mobilize millions to kill hundreds of thousands worldwide.

Goebbels was the father of modern propaganda in a totalitarian state (a term that he coined), in which he made use of every available means. The propaganda he spread was remarkably replete with defamations, libels, and lies; he was convinced that people would believe the lies if only they were repeated often enough, and the bigger the lie, the better chance it had of being believed. Goebbel's propaganda always incited hate against some enemy. He was a radical and fanatic anti-semite, but his hatred of Jews was also based on utilitarian considerations of exploiting anti-semitism for the furthering of his propaganda aims.

I have to ask, is this a danger? Is this a campaign for the hearts and minds of our youth in America? Is this a terrorist campaign within our own borders? Here's the definition of "terrorism" taken from Webster dictionary published by Specified Complexity House.

Noun

1.

terrorism - the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear Synonyms: act of terrorism, terrorist act

Now at this point you are probably saying, "Come on Bastard, that's a stretch!" But is it really? They have all three symptoms of a terrorist group, they're just not blowing things up yet! They use the intimidation of funding to push our politicians around, they use coercion to convince their parishioners that evolution is a myth and they instill fear into their followers by telling them that gays, activist judges and Planned Parenthood, among other things, are the downfall of this great nation. And they repeat this hatred over and over and over again. These radical right preachers are employing Goebbel's strategy for propaganda. This is no different than the terrorist mastermind telling the next fanatical suicide bomber to save one of their 72 virgins for him.

They don't need to blow anything up, they are psychologists using the one WMD that fails to be listed as such, the manipulation of the human mind. The end run to win the hearts and minds of our youth. Governments use this tactic all over the world. These radical right organizations are using it within our own borders and calling it religion.

Not only are these organizations at the forefront of the "dumbification" of America they are also being funded by the government. Yes, your tax dollars are going to help these cults teach our children that evolution and other silly theories do not hold water next to the preachings of these upstanding citizens. Again, from the Specified Complexity House dictionary,

Noun	1.	cult - adherents of an exclusive system of religious beliefs and practices
	2.	cult - an interest followed with exaggerated zeal; "he always follows the latest fads"; "it was all the rage that season" Synonyms: craze, fad, furor, furore, rage
	3.	cult - a system of religious beliefs and rituals; "devoted to the cultus of the Blessed Virgin" Synonyms: cultus, religious cult

I wouldn't be surprised if I woke up tomorrow and learned that 55% of the U.S. population had died from drinking a mix of Kool-Aid and cyanide because these radical evangelical leaders had expressed an interest in catching the next comet to heaven.

Well anyway, Happy Easter! Have a great day and let's not worry about the  "dumbification" of America.

P.S. You thought this post was actually going to be about Easter, the bunny rabbit and all the chocolate and eggs? Well, sorry. But not to let anyone down, you can go read that stuff here, the festival of Eastre.

cross posted at (Bring It On)

Medical Terrorism????

Did I miss something or did Al-Qaeda actually infiltrate a Florida hospice?

"House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) called the removal of the feeding tube "barbarism" and "an act of medical terrorism."

Terri Really Isn't That Important

George W. Bush commenting on the Terri Shriavo case.

"In cases like this one, where there are serious questions and substantial doubts, our society, our laws, and our courts should have a presumption in favor of life,"

George W. Bush March 21, 2005

REALLY?????? Then while Governor of Texas why did you pass this law?

Texas Futile Care law which expressly gives hospitals the right to remove life support if the patient could not pay and there was no hope of revival, regardless of the patient's family's wishes.

Under this law, a baby was removed from life support against his mother's wishes in Texas just this past week. A 68 year old man was given a temporary reprieve by the Texas courts a few days later. Gee that guy was lucky that atleast one hospital thought he was a keeper plus he could pay.

The truth is George W. Bush and the radical right don't really care about Terri or the 6 month old baby that was pulled off life support. They only care about the 25 seats up for grabs in the 2006 election as explained here.

Hey, right to lifers where was your prayer vigil for this case?

A Question for the Terri Fan Club

Did you ever think that maybe God sent for Terri 15 years ago and all you rightwing, Bible humping fucknuts are just meddling in divine will?

You go against science when officials say stem cell research will possibly save thousands of lives because you all believe that would be "playing God." But,  you all "play God" and back science up every time you force the feeding tube back into this lady.

Yeah, that's right, she is alive only by the miracle of science and not the hand of God. She's alive because all you Bible cock stars have personal agenda's. You will defend her because you say she is defenseless but your the first to pull the switch on retards and minors because they did something wrong. They might not understand what they did wrong but Fuck'um, pull the switch! You can't have it both ways, either defend everyone or keep quiet. Your intentions are meaningless if you don't defend everyone. Are we not all Gods children? Or does that only apply when you want someone to send in a check?

The Radical Right Says, "F**K YOU, PAY ME!"

"If the debtor be insolvent to serve creditors, let his body be cut in pieces on the third market day. It may be cut into more or fewer pieces with impunity. Or, if his creditors consent to it, let him be sold to foreigners beyond the Tiber."

A report released last month by Harvard Medical and Law has been nice enough to point out that our bankruptcy system works differently from ancient Rome's; creditors carve up the debtor's assets, not the debtor.

They were also nice enough to point out that after conducting their survey they found out that half of the bankruptcy filings in 2001 were due to medical causes. Here are some highlights from their study;

Who Files For Bankruptcy?

The average debtor was a 41-year-old woman with children, and at least some college education. On average, each bankruptcy involved 1.32 debtors with 1.33 dependents. The 1.4 million personal bankruptcies filed in 2001 involved a total of 3.7 million people: 1.9 million were the debtor and the other 1.8 million were their children or dependents. More than one quarter cited illness or injury as reasons for their bankruptcy, 46.2% fit the criteria for "major medical bankruptcy," 54.5% met the criteria for "any medical bankruptcy."

During the two years before filing, 40.3% had lost telephone service; 19.4% had gone without food; 53.6% went without needed doctor or dentist visits because of the cost (but wait, aren't they sick?); and 43.0% had failed to fill a prescription (but wait, how do they get better?).

Following bankruptcy filings, about one-third of debtors continued to have problems paying bills (under the new law they should have no problem paying some of it back). 3.1% were turned down for jobs (don't worry, they will be able to pay it back); 5.8% were turned down for mortgages; 4.9% were turned down for apartment rentals; and 9.3% were turned down for car loans because of the bankruptcy on their credit reports.

In three-quarters of cases the person experiencing the illness/injury was the debtor; in 13.3% a child; and in 8.2% an elderly relative.

Almost 60% of families bankrupted by medical problems indicated medical bills (from medical providers) as the primary reason for bankruptcy; 47.6% cited drug costs; 35.3% had curtailed employment because of illness---often (52.8%) to care for someone else.

Almost 76% of these debtors were insured at the onset; 60.1% initially had private coverage, but one-third of them lost coverage during the course of their illness. 5.7% had Medicare, 8.4% had Medicaid and 1.6% were veterans with military coverage.

The Human Face of Bankruptcy

Debtors' narratives painted a picture of families arriving at the bankruptcy courthouse emotionally and financially exhausted, hoping to stop the collection calls, save their homes, and stabilize their economic circumstances.

Many of the debtors detailed ongoing problems in access to care. Some expressed fear that their medical providers would refuse to continue their care, and a few recounted actual experiences of this kind. Several had used credit cards to charge medical bills they had no hope of paying.

The co-occurrence of medical and job problems was a common theme. For instance one debtor underwent lung surgery and suffered a heart attack. Both hospitalizations were covered by his employer-paid insurance, but he was unable to return to his physically-demanding [sic] job. He found new employment, but was denied coverage due to his pre-existing conditions which required costly ongoing care. Similarly, a school-teacher who suffered a heart attack was unable to return to work for many months, and hence her coverage lapsed. A hospital wrote off her $20,000 debt, but she was nonetheless bankrupted by doctor bills and the cost of medications.

A second common theme was sounded by parents of premature infants or chronically ill children; many took time off from work or incurred large bills for home-care while they were at their jobs.

Finally, many of the insured debtors blamed high co-payments and deductibles for their financial ruin. For example, a man insured through his employer (a large national firm) suffered a broken leg and torn knee ligaments. He incurred $13,000 in out-of-pocket costs for co-payments, deductibles and uncovered services---much of it for physical therapy.

It's time to play political hard ball with this issue! If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. If you don't want to play with the big dogs than go sit on the porch you rightwing corporate lap dogs!

Before you radical, Bible thumping, ass clowns start spewing onto your blogs that people need to be responsible for their bills and stop applying for credit cards, maybe you should do some research and think for yourselves. Your usual ramblings of the rightwing party line are not only getting boring, they are downright ignorant to the problem at hand.

"It seems to me to be fair to those people to whom they pay their debt. We preserve the principle of a fresh start, but we also establish a principle that if one has the ability to repay some of their debt, they are not going to get off scot-free,"

Senator Charles E. Grassley

Now let me be the first to translate this into plain English so that all you rightwing nuts can understand the basic concept of the new law if passed;

“That’s the way it was with a wise guy partner. He gets his money no matter what. You got no business? Fuck you, pay me. You had a fire? Fuck you, pay me.  The place got hit by lighting and World War III started in the lounge? Fuck you, pay me…”

Mobster Henry Hill

This is not a Republican versus Democrat issue! We all get sick in similar ways and all have the same problems with medical coverage. This is about greedy corporations wanting more and Bush & Co. all to happy to oblige them. Is this what you call compassionate conservatism?

So, if this law passes the House, all you rightwing fanatics that think this is all about people being more responsible with their credit cards can take this post, put it in your pipe, smoke it, get cancer, go bankrupt from treatments, claim bankruptcy, get turned down and die (in that order)!

And to think they also wanted to cut Medicaid!

Comment Here!

Hang the Bastard, He's A Foreigner

On Monday, March 28th SCOTUS will here another argument involving capital punishment, this time the case involves a Mexican national named Jose Ernesto Medellin. Those of you not familiar with the case, Jose Medellin was charged and convicted of a brutal double homicide that took place on June 24, 1993, for a better understanding of the brutality of the case you can go here. Jose was 18 years old at the time the crime was committed and was sentenced to death under Texas state law.

Jose Medellin was assigned a public defender who according to briefs filed with the Supreme Court was less then competent to handle the case.

B. The Decisions of the Texas Courts.

On June 29, 1993, law enforcement authorities arrested Mr. Medellín, 18 years old at the time, in connection with two murders in Houston, Texas. Mr. Medellín, a Mexican national, told the arresting officers that he was born in Laredo, Mexico, and informed Harris County Pretrial Services that he was not a United States citizen. It is uncontested that, nevertheless, Mr. Medellín was not advised of his right under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention to contact the Mexican consul. The United States recognizes that the consular assistance Mexico provides its nationals in capital cases is “extraordinary.” At the time Mr. Medellín was arrested and tried, Mexican consular officers routinely assisted capital defendants by providing funding for experts and investigators, gathering mitigating evidence, acting as a liaison with Spanish-speaking family members, and, most importantly, ensuring that Mexican nationals were represented by competent and experienced defense counsel.4 As a result of the Article 36 violation in his case, however, Mr. Medellín had no opportunity to receive the assistance of Mexican consular officers either before or during his trial. The Texas trial court appointed counsel to represent Mr. Medellín, who was indigent.

On September 16, 1994, Mr. Medellín was convicted of capital murder and, upon the jury’s recommendation, the trial court sentenced Mr. Medellín to death on October 11, 1994.

On March 16, 1997, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Mr. Medellín’s conviction and sentence in an unpublished opinion.

On April 29, 1997, some six weeks after the affirmance of his death sentence on direct appeal, Mexican consular authorities first learned of Mr. Medellín’s arrest, detention, trial, conviction, and sentence. They promptly began rendering assistance. During the course of the preparation for Mr. Medellín’s trial, lead counsel was suspended from the practice of law for ethics violations in another case. During jury selection, he failed to strike jurors who indicated they would automatically impose the death penalty. During the guilt phase of trial, counsel called no witnesses. At the penalty phase, he presented only one expert witness (a psychologist who had never met Mr. Medellín) and Mr. Medellín’s parents testified only briefly. The entire penalty phase defense lasted less than two hours.

The incompetency of Mr. Medellin's lawyer is, unfortunately, not the reason this case is going in front of SCOTUS. To sum it up in a nut shell, the Mexican government is arguing that the United States violated Mr. Medellin's rights by not informing him or giving him access to the Mexican Consular when he was arrested. For this reason Mr. Medellin's case needs to be reviewed siting that local law enforcement violated the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and Article 36 within this treaty that the United States, itself, designed that allows the World Court to hear disputes over consular access.

This case was in fact brought before the World Court and the court ruled that the United States was in fact in violation of Article 36 of the treaty and that Mr. Medellins case would have to be reviewed again. The United States is not unfamiliar with Article 36 of the treaty because they used it in 1979 to successfully sue Iran for the taking of American hostages.

Now the right wingers are arguing that this is just another instance of international law, U.N. law interfering in our domestic affairs and that the international community does not have a right to influence decision within our courts.

This cannot be farther from the truth, the fact of the matter is that we signed a treaty with 166 other countries in the world that if our citizens get arrested in their countries or their citizens get arrested in our country they would have unfettered access to their consular. That's it, its that simple, its not about international influence, its not about the death penalty, its about honoring a treaty that we signed to help protect our citizens abroad.

And you would think in these times we live in this would be high on the agenda of the Bush administration to protect our citizens abroad. Well folks, its not, just last week in an effort to influence the upcoming SCOTUS hearing the State Department said it has withdrawn from the optional protocol under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention. In effect putting every U.S. citizen abroad at risk of having their individual rights violated.

Now when your in Mexico or anywhere else over seas and you get arrested, you have no rights accept their rights. And they have the right to remember this case and lock you up with 7 or 8 butt loving conquistadors all named Paco and throw away the key. No one would ever know because since we are not part of the treaty anymore they don't have to tell anyone you are there.

I can hear it now, oh, you don't think this guy needs to die, oh, your against the death penalty. Well, lets put an end to the spin before it begins, there is no doubt in my mind that this guy needs to be strung from the highest tree in Texas and they have every right  to do so. But the bottom line is that Mr. Medellin has rights too and local law enforcement violated them after they arrested him.

You want to blame anyone for this guy not getting the chair you need to blame the local law enforcement for not doing their job. Don't they watch Law and Order? The city prosecutor is always yelling at the cops for not crossing their t's and dotting their i's because they might put the case in jeopardy.

OKC and the Terrorist Connections

"When the full stories of these two incidents (1993 WTC Center bombing and 1995 Oklahoma City bombing) are finally told, those who permitted the investigations to stop short will owe big explanations to these two brave women (Middle East expert Laurie Mylroie and journalist Jayna Davis). And the nation will owe them a debt of gratitude."

- Former CIA Director James Woolsey,

Let me first state that I am not big on conspiracies and I'm not writing this piece to pretend that I'm an investigative reporter, because I'm not. I'm just intrigued at my last poll results that stated that 84% of the people that took the poll believe that McVeigh and Nichols had no connection with Al-Qaeda. I should have included a choice on whether they had connections with other foreign terrorists but I didn't, I'm not the Gallup Poll and the poll is far from scientific, only 64 people responded.

What started to make me think about this connection was a special I saw on the History Channel that looked at the possibility that these two men did not act alone. What stood out the most for me was what they have dubbed "The Philippine Connection", the whole idea that Terry Nichols met with Iraqi operatives in the Philippines. Watching the program you get pulled into all of these what ifs and sound bites that when put together makes for an intriguing argument for a good conspiracy cover up or is it all just right wing media hype to try and pin some more stuff on President Clinton and the "left"? I did some searches on the web but most information regarding the cover up is interestingly enough only on ring wing web sites or blogs. None of the news agencies have anything to report (WSJ, WT, CNN) except questions and maybe spinning of an agenda like at Fox News with Bill O'Reilly.

Most of the reporting on this topic is all based on what seems to be a substantial amount of investigative work done by a journalist named Jayna Davis. And I have to say when you leave her site, you leave with more questions then answers.

I have to admit I find it hard to believe that these two men acted alone and that the government stopped short their investigation to deliver a speedy conviction. I also wonder sometimes about their alledged connections with the neo-nazi movement. I mean muslims and neo nazis' come from very different backgrounds but they share common goals, these goals being the destruction of the Jewish state and the fall of the United States. So why wouldn't they want to co-operate to achieve these common goals?

I'm not sure what to think, anyone have anything to add to this? Is it just the right wing spinning or is there a real cover up going on here?

Jerking Off In the Public Library

My wife and I were having a political discussion last weekend about constitutional rights and the subject, introduced by her, came up about the right to view porn sites in a public library.

I must admit that she is a lot farther to the left then I would like but she is my wife so I accommodate her thought pattern. She was arguing that it should be O.K. for people to look up sites on the web, at a public library, where as the sites content has to do primarily with sex.

My rebuttal to her argument was that the library is no place for people to be looking up porn sites for personal pleasure. A public library is no place to let someone fulfill or indulge in their personal fantasies. This kind of activity can be performed in the privacy of someones home without insult or injury to the person passing by. So why should it be allowed in the public library?

She addressed this remark by stating that "what if you were a college student doing a research paper, wouldn't you want access to all materials possible to conduct your research?"

I have to admit I was perplexed by her response, I thought, well she might have a point here, isn't the public library, before the age of the Internet, the place where citizens went to conduct research? So, how could municipalities put restrictions on what can and can't be looked at on a computer at the public library? Isn't the public library exactly that, "a public library"?

So I gathered my thoughts real quick and I argued that libraries have never had pornographic magazines on the shelves next to other publications that are readily available, so why should access to a porn site on a computer, at a public library, be any different?

Her response was, "its not any different, we've just been censored for a long time before the age of the Internet."

At this point I knew the discussion was going nowhere fast so I asked her "how important is this issue that you need to make a stand, plant a flag, in the middle of a public library?"

And her response was, "it's no different then people saying I have to look at the ten commandments every time I enter a public court house, it's a religious marking, it offends me, no different then porn in a public library."

I realized at this point that my wife was not arguing her beliefs but that she was arguing her rights as an American citizen not to be afflicted by the thoughts of others within a government building that she frequents often.

So I started thinking of a compromise, what if we put private viewing booths in the libraries for computers that have Internet access, were as anyone can do whatever they want, shielded from public view, and we will do the same in the court houses. We will allow viewing of the ten commandments but only if it's in a private viewing area where, just like porn in the library, the true believers can jerk off all they want without offending anybody.

Click here to comment

A Brand Spanking New Site

A few of us from around the blogashpere have joined forces to bring you a new and fascinating site where we will be posting our most heart felt deepest feelings in all their true colors just so the neo cons and radical right fella's don't have to visit each one of our sites individually to call us stupid, silly, or childhood names. Thats not true, some of them use bigger words. But maybe, just maybe we might get some thought provocative discussions going and who knows we might become bunk buddies like Clinton and Bush Sr.. So if you are ready for the challenge, come on over and bring it on!

Franklin D. Roosevelt Holds First Fireside Chat

Fireside Chat 1 (March 12, 1933)
On the Bank Crisis

I want to talk for a few minutes with the people of the United States about banking -- with the comparatively few who understand the mechanics of banking but more particularly with the overwhelming majority who use banks for the making of deposits and the drawing of checks. I want to tell you what has been done in the last few days, why it was done, and what the next steps are going to be. I recognize that the many proclamations from State Capitols and from Washington, the legislation, the Treasury regulations, etc., couched for the most part in banking and legal terms should be explained for the benefit of the average citizen. I owe this in particular because of the fortitude and good temper with which everybody has accepted the inconvenience and hardships of the banking holiday. I know that when you understand what we in Washington have been about I shall continue to have your cooperation as fully as I have had your sympathy and help during the past week.

First of all let me state the simple fact that when you deposit money in a bank the bank does not put the money into a safe deposit vault. It invests your money in many different forms of credit-bonds, commercial paper, mortgages and many other kinds of loans. In other words, the bank puts your money to work to keep the wheels of industry and of agriculture turning around. A comparatively small part of the money you put into the bank is kept in currency -- an amount which in normal times is wholly sufficient to cover the cash needs of the average citizen. In other words the total amount of all the currency in the country is only a small fraction of the total deposits in all of the banks.

What, then, happened during the last few days of February and the first few days of March? Because of undermined confidence on the part of the public, there was a general rush by a large portion of our population to turn bank deposits into currency or gold. -- A rush so great that the soundest banks could not get enough currency to meet the demand. The reason for this was that on the spur of the moment it was, of course, impossible to sell perfectly sound assets of a bank and convert them into cash except at panic prices far below their real value.

By the afternoon of March 3 scarcely a bank in the country was open to do business. Proclamations temporarily closing them in whole or in part had been issued by the Governors in almost all the states.

It was then that I issued the proclamation providing for the nation-wide bank holiday, and this was the first step in the Government's reconstruction of our financial and economic fabric.
The second step was the legislation promptly and patriotically passed by the Congress confirming my proclamation and broadening my powers so that it became possible in view of the requirement of time to entend (sic) the holiday and lift the ban of that holiday gradually. This law also gave authority to develop a program of rehabilitation of our banking facilities. I want to tell our citizens in every part of the Nation that the national Congress -- Republicans and Democrats alike -- showed by this action a devotion to public welfare and a realization of the emergency and the necessity for speed that it is difficult to match in our history.

The third stage has been the series of regulations permitting the banks to continue their functions to take care of the distribution of food and household necessities and the payment of payrolls.

This bank holiday while resulting in many cases in great inconvenience is affording us the opportunity to supply the currency necessary to meet the situation. No sound bank is a dollar worse off than it was when it closed its doors last Monday. Neither is any bank which may turn out not to be in a position for immediate opening. The new law allows the twelve Federal Reserve banks to issue additional currency on good assets and thus the banks that reopen will be able to meet every legitimate call. The new currency is being sent out by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing in large volume to every part of the country. It is sound currency because it is backed by actual, good assets.

A question you will ask is this - why are all the banks not to be reopened at the same time? The answer is simple. Your Government does not intend that the history of the past few years shall be repeated. WE do not want and will not have another epidemic of bank failures.

As a result we start tomorrow, Monday, with the opening of banks in the twelve Federal Reserve Bank cities -- those banks which on first examination by the Treasury have already been found to be all right. This will be followed on Tuesday by the resumption of all their functions by banks already found to be sound in cities where there are recognized clearinghouses. That means about 250 cities of the United States.

On Wednesday and succeeding days banks in smaller places all through the country will resume business, subject, of course, to the Government's physical ability to complete its survey. It is necessary that the reopening of banks be extended over a period in order to permit the banks to make applications for necessary loans, to obtain currency needed to meet their requirements and to enable the Government to make common sense checkups.

Let me make it clear to you that if your bank does not open the first day you are by no means justified in believing that it will not open. A bank that opens on one of the subsequent days is in exactly the same status as the bank that opens tomorrow.

I know that many people are worrying about State banks not members of the Federal Reserve System. These banks can and will receive assistance from member banks and from the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. These state banks are following the same course as the national banks except that they get their licenses to resume business from the state authorities, and these authorities have been asked by the Secretary of the Treasury to permit their good banks to open up on the same schedule as the national banks. I am confident that the state banking departments will be as careful as the National Government in the policy relating to the opening of banks and will follow the same broad policy.

It is possible that when the banks resume a very few people who have not recovered from their fear may again begin withdrawals. Let me make it clear that the banks will take care of all needs -- and it is my belief that hoarding during the past week has become an exceedingly unfashionable pastime. It needs no prophet to tell you that when the people find that they can get their money -- that they can get it when they want it for all legitimate purposes -- the phantom of fear will soon be laid. People will again be glad to have their money where it will be safely taken care of and where they can use it conveniently at any time. I can assure you that it is safer to keep your money in a reopened bank than under the mattress.

The success of our whole great national program depends, of course, upon the cooperation of the public -- on its intelligent support and use of a reliable system.

Remember that the essential accomplishment of the new legislation is that it makes it possible for banks more readily to convert their assets into cash than was the case before. More liberal provision has been made for banks to borrow on these assets at the Reserve Banks and more liberal provision has also been made for issuing currency on the security of those good assets. This currency is not fiat currency. It is issued only on adequate security -- and every good bank has an abundance of such security.

One more point before I close. There will be, of course, some banks unable to reopen without being reorganized. The new law allows the Government to assist in making these reorganizations quickly and effectively and even allows the Government to subscribe to at least a part of new capital which may be required.

I hope you can see from this elemental recital of what your government is doing that there is nothing complex, or radical in the process.

We had a bad banking situation. Some of our bankers had shown themselves either incompetent or dishonest in their handling of the people's funds. They had used the money entrusted to them in speculations and unwise loans. This was of course not true in the vast majority of our banks but it was true in enough of them to shock the people for a time into a sense of insecurity and to put them into a frame of mind where they did not differentiate, but seemed to assume that the acts of a comparative few had tainted them all. It was the Government's job to straighten out this situation and do it as quickly as possible -- and the job is being performed.

I do not promise you that every bank will be reopened or that individual losses will not be suffered, but there will be no losses that possibly could be avoided; and there would have been more and greater losses had we continued to drift. I can even promise you salvation for some at least of the sorely pressed banks. We shall be engaged not merely in reopening sound banks but in the creation of sound banks through reorganization. It has been wonderful to me to catch the note of confidence from all over the country. I can never be sufficiently grateful to the people for the loyal support they have given me in their acceptance of the judgment that has dictated our course, even though all of our processes may not have seemed clear to them.

After all there is an element in the readjustment of our financial system more important than currency, more important than gold, and that is the confidence of the people. Confidence and courage are the essentials of success in carrying out our plan. You people must have faith; you must not be stampeded by rumors or guesses. Let us unite in banishing fear. We have provided the machinery to restore our financial system; it is up to you to support and make it work.

It is your problem no less than it is mine. Together we cannot fail.