Reid is offering doctors a deal. If they'll support killing their future, hurting their patients, cutting seniors' health benefits, then he, Reid, will freeze cuts in Medicare payments.
Hmmm, let's think about how this is going to work.
The doctors are getting shafted now when it comes to Medicare, they are paying extra staff just to take care of the paperwork involved, many have stopped taking Medicare already, budget cuts across the country are delaying whatever paltry payments they receive... but Reid is going to ensure it doesn't get worse.
Oh, wait, he's not going to ensure it doesn't get worse, he's just going to freeze cuts. For now.
He can only promise to put something in the bill, he can't guarantee that 1) it'll make it through the entire process and 2) if it does, that next year they won't vote in a change.
If Reid and friends are attempting this kind of fraudulent wheelin' and dealin' with doctors, can you imagine the deals that are going on behind closed doors?
Saw the bill from the Senate this morning on Fox & Friends. 1502 pages and they haven't even begun to start adding their wish lists and "tweaking" the thing.
The "public option" is back on the table again. Ya know, now that they got Olympia Snow to sell her soul to get it onto the floor 'cause it didn't have the pubic option??? Trust ain't a commodity that goes for much in Congress.
From The Hill:
Reid offers doctors a deal
By Alexander Bolton
The White House and Democratic leaders are offering doctors a deal: They'll freeze cuts in Medicare payments to doctors in exchange for doctors' support of healthcare reform.
Read more: http://www.thehill.com/homenews/senate/63811-reid-offers-docs-a-deal
Showing posts with label congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label congress. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
What's the rush on the health care bill?
I've been pondering this one for weeks, reading articles, listening to pundits, talking with friends. There are as many opinions as there are pundits.
At first, the rush would have been, in my opinion, to keep the American people in the dark. The idea being to get it through before we all woke up.
Didn't happen. We're awake and roaring.
Then the rush became one to get it through before the tide turned completely. The more information that leaked out or made it past the media barrier they've erected, the unhappier the public would become.
Another reason to push is to get it done so they can move on and tackle other things looming on the horizon while they still have a majority in Congress. Card check. Global warming (now climate change since they can't adequately explain the cold weather and temperature decreases). All the rest of the mess Obama is trying to push down America's collective throat.
Obama has a lot to finish up before the 2010 elections. Maybe he feels it's now or never. But then again, he must know, or worry, that if he pushes all his mess through before November 2010, quite possibly the elections will bring a veto-proof majority from the "other side" into Congress. If that happens he has risked a lot given they'll hopefully reverse many, if not most, of his radical changes and he'll have a Congress who won't jump when he says jump.
Which brings me back to wondering why Obama and his crew are willing to risk losing Congress in 2010 just to push through some or all of his agenda. They must have something in the wings they think will protect them in the 2010 elections.
That is the only logical reason I can see for alienating and rousing the sleeping majority.
As said, I believe the end result of success in getting those Obama policies and bills through, the ones we KNOW about at least, is quite assuredly that Obama and the Democrats will lose their stranglehold on Congress in 2010.
Or do they think that once we have health care ala Obama that we'll love it by 2010? or that we'll go back to sleep? What are they banking on? I just can't believe that the Democrats are dumb enough to risk their elected office to get Obama's agenda through.
Maybe Obama is counting on the fact that if he can push more people over to dependency on government by the time the 2010 elections roll around they'll vote to keep those who're giving out the handouts in office. It would be a diabolical plot wouldn't it?
The Cloward-Piven strategy per an article in World Net Daily:
So, maybe what we're living through is the culmination of a long-term plot as many are saying...
Maybe Obama believes that the financial crisis combined with the Democratic majority combined with his Presidency is a divine mandate to enact his very radical agenda.
Maybe he truly believes that if he can get all this through, the upheaval, turmoil and destruction of the values and precepts in the Constitution will result in a better America, a better world.
Maybe he believes that once we get through it we'll embrace his new world.
Then again, maybe he doesn't care whether we do or not. After all, he'll be part of the new elite and won't have to deal with whatever pain you and I, the "worker class" have to endure.
No matter what he believes about where we're heading under his 'leadership', he still has to get through the 2010 elections. Which brings me back to the thought that he must have something up his sleeve for next year. Although I mentioned
In the back of my mind I'm wondering what's going on with Obama's promise to put an army of civilians to work in the country. You remember this one:
July 2, Colorado Springs: "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
The government "ACORN"? The secret weapon in the 2010 election?
ACORN, the biggest Obama getting vote thief, is running for cover at the moment. It's a victory of sorts, but the people who make up ACORN aren't going away. They'll just find new organizations and new hidey-holes. The demise or diminishing of ACORN may actually have the reverse effect of energizing some of the Left's minions. Maybe they'll sign up for the new Obama civilian army... or he'll put them in charge of it.
Something is going on. When I look at all the pieces of the Obama agenda and start to try and make it into a cohesive completed puzzle, I still haven't quite figured out what it's going to look like. The pieces that are still missing for me are the "hows" of getting through the 2010 elections.
Maybe he doesn't think we'll be able to act in concert to 'kick the bums out' in 2010. Maybe he underestimates the numbers. Maybe he's forgetting that for every Tea Party protester, there are 20, 50, 500 or more sitting at home watching, believing, encouraging and waiting to show their ire at the ballot box.
I have never been so proud of our America as I was when I saw the numbers marching in Washington on September 12th and then got reports from across the country of similar efforts going on in small and large towns. We're out here. We're out there. Hopefully we'll still have the right to vote in a free and honest election in 2010. If we do, change is going to happen. Real change. The right kind of change.
At first, the rush would have been, in my opinion, to keep the American people in the dark. The idea being to get it through before we all woke up.
Didn't happen. We're awake and roaring.
Then the rush became one to get it through before the tide turned completely. The more information that leaked out or made it past the media barrier they've erected, the unhappier the public would become.
Another reason to push is to get it done so they can move on and tackle other things looming on the horizon while they still have a majority in Congress. Card check. Global warming (now climate change since they can't adequately explain the cold weather and temperature decreases). All the rest of the mess Obama is trying to push down America's collective throat.
Obama has a lot to finish up before the 2010 elections. Maybe he feels it's now or never. But then again, he must know, or worry, that if he pushes all his mess through before November 2010, quite possibly the elections will bring a veto-proof majority from the "other side" into Congress. If that happens he has risked a lot given they'll hopefully reverse many, if not most, of his radical changes and he'll have a Congress who won't jump when he says jump.
Which brings me back to wondering why Obama and his crew are willing to risk losing Congress in 2010 just to push through some or all of his agenda. They must have something in the wings they think will protect them in the 2010 elections.
That is the only logical reason I can see for alienating and rousing the sleeping majority.
As said, I believe the end result of success in getting those Obama policies and bills through, the ones we KNOW about at least, is quite assuredly that Obama and the Democrats will lose their stranglehold on Congress in 2010.
Or do they think that once we have health care ala Obama that we'll love it by 2010? or that we'll go back to sleep? What are they banking on? I just can't believe that the Democrats are dumb enough to risk their elected office to get Obama's agenda through.
Maybe Obama is counting on the fact that if he can push more people over to dependency on government by the time the 2010 elections roll around they'll vote to keep those who're giving out the handouts in office. It would be a diabolical plot wouldn't it?
The Cloward-Piven strategy per an article in World Net Daily:
David Horowitz, a long-time student of leftist political movements in the United States, characterized the Cloward-Piven strategy as seeking "to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse."
Cloward and Piven argued a "guaranteed annual income" should be established as an entitlement for the poor, a right the poor could assert and demand to be paid.
Arguing for massive registration of poor in existing social welfare programs, Cloward and Piven sought to create a crisis that could be exploited to obtain a fundamental redistribution of power in favor of the "have-nots."
Advancing their socialist revolutionary aims, Cloward and Piven explained the crisis they sought "can occur spontaneously (e.g., riots) or as the intended result of tactics of demonstration and protest which either generate institutional disruption or bring unrecognized disruption to public attention."
The Cloward-Piven strategy sought to apply the tactics of the revolutionary civil rights movement, including urban riots, to the poor as a whole, transcending interest-group politics defined by race to involve interest-group politics defined by class.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=97956
So, maybe what we're living through is the culmination of a long-term plot as many are saying...
Maybe Obama believes that the financial crisis combined with the Democratic majority combined with his Presidency is a divine mandate to enact his very radical agenda.
Maybe he truly believes that if he can get all this through, the upheaval, turmoil and destruction of the values and precepts in the Constitution will result in a better America, a better world.
Maybe he believes that once we get through it we'll embrace his new world.
Then again, maybe he doesn't care whether we do or not. After all, he'll be part of the new elite and won't have to deal with whatever pain you and I, the "worker class" have to endure.
No matter what he believes about where we're heading under his 'leadership', he still has to get through the 2010 elections. Which brings me back to the thought that he must have something up his sleeve for next year. Although I mentioned
In the back of my mind I'm wondering what's going on with Obama's promise to put an army of civilians to work in the country. You remember this one:
July 2, Colorado Springs: "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
The government "ACORN"? The secret weapon in the 2010 election?
ACORN, the biggest Obama getting vote thief, is running for cover at the moment. It's a victory of sorts, but the people who make up ACORN aren't going away. They'll just find new organizations and new hidey-holes. The demise or diminishing of ACORN may actually have the reverse effect of energizing some of the Left's minions. Maybe they'll sign up for the new Obama civilian army... or he'll put them in charge of it.
Something is going on. When I look at all the pieces of the Obama agenda and start to try and make it into a cohesive completed puzzle, I still haven't quite figured out what it's going to look like. The pieces that are still missing for me are the "hows" of getting through the 2010 elections.
Maybe he doesn't think we'll be able to act in concert to 'kick the bums out' in 2010. Maybe he underestimates the numbers. Maybe he's forgetting that for every Tea Party protester, there are 20, 50, 500 or more sitting at home watching, believing, encouraging and waiting to show their ire at the ballot box.
I have never been so proud of our America as I was when I saw the numbers marching in Washington on September 12th and then got reports from across the country of similar efforts going on in small and large towns. We're out here. We're out there. Hopefully we'll still have the right to vote in a free and honest election in 2010. If we do, change is going to happen. Real change. The right kind of change.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
It's not just Obama
While Obama may be the driving force behind the current attempts of government to take over our health system, he's not my biggest concern. Yes, I believe he is trying to take our democracy down the path to socialism, whether you want to call it socialism, nationalization or "doing what's best for Americans". I certainly believe he and the Democratic Congress are blurring the path between free enterprise and government, interfering and stabbing democracy in the front (and the back).
However, like and trust Obama and his plans or not, the biggest problem with government involvement in health care and other aspects of our lives isn't what's going to happen during Obama's administration. The biggest changes are going to happen down the road, post-Obama ("assuming" he doesn't figure out some way to turn us into a Chavez nation where term limits and true-free voting don't exist).
Once the government gets their mitts into our health care it becomes another power base for Washington DC bureaucrats. It becomes another place for government workers to protect their jobs and coast to retirement. It becomes a place where mini-despots act out their desires to rule and be superior to someone, anyone, but mainly those who come begging for a health procedure. It becomes anything BUT good.
Even if you're an Obama-lover, can you really expect the next batch of government types to live up to the lofty ideals being advertised by current proponents? You have to know oh skeptical ones, that those touting the "change" are often doing so for personal reasons, for personal or capitalistic gain? We've already head the leaks of power deals being made between drug companies and the Obama administration.... what haven't we heard about?
Why do people think the top echelon of AARP and the AMA are quasi-signing on while the larger part of their base is opposing the move? Come on, we know this is just another power shift. Deals are being made as I type... Although, those who are making deals to keep their power and dollars should look at history and know that the kind of promises made during power shifts are often not worth the time it took to shake hands. It's a "whatever we need to do now" mentality that rules during huge governmental change, then, when the changes happen those that helped are next in the steamroller's path.
Welfare started out as something the government, notably President Roosevelt, did to "help" during and after the Great Depression. During that period of time Social Security and unemployment compensation came into being. Those changes created generations of people completely dependent upon the government. Can anyone really say that was a good thing? Sure, it was good temporarily for those who'd hit rock bottom and those who were headed in that direction. But if they government hadn't stepped in to redistribute wealth, would we have survived? would we have been a stronger country?
What if, instead of giving hand outs to individuals, the government had given loans to businesses so people could work, have jobs, be self-sufficient? What if they had made the hand-outs temporary while creating jobs, then stopped the programs (which I believe was the original intention)? What if... there are a lot of what ifs...
Now we're in a temporary downturn and people are hurting. We'll get through it. We would have gotten through it without the 'stimulus' redistribution of our tax-dollars by Congress. Like-wise, we can also make changes in how health care is handled without having government take over any portion of the process.
Government health care will become another boondoggle program that curtails self-dependence. If the government, if Congress, is successful and mucks this one up, we will become a true nation of government-dependent weenies. We are close to going over the line from true democracy to some form of socialism, whether you want to use that label or not. Government-run or government-involved health care will be the proverbial straw that breaks American democracy's back.
Today I heard the government is digging deeper into private business, wanting the salaries and compensation info from insurance companies. Why? So they can continue their demonization and take over of private enterprise. It's a slippery, slippery slope we're on right now. Who figures out where to draw the line?
Even if you believe Obama and friends are right, that the government should offer a public option, do you trust future governmental types to run it efficiently and honestly?
The point being, you don't KNOW who's going to be making future decisions. All we really know is that once the government gets involved we have Welfare, the IRS, the Post Office, and our Medicare and Medicaid programs which are riddled with abuse and waste. No matter how good Obama and others make it sound, no matter how they vilify the current system, it's not going to be better when the government takes over. These will become the good old days for those of us who live through the transition. The next generations will only know government run health care, just like so many now only know Welfare. Scary.
However, like and trust Obama and his plans or not, the biggest problem with government involvement in health care and other aspects of our lives isn't what's going to happen during Obama's administration. The biggest changes are going to happen down the road, post-Obama ("assuming" he doesn't figure out some way to turn us into a Chavez nation where term limits and true-free voting don't exist).
Once the government gets their mitts into our health care it becomes another power base for Washington DC bureaucrats. It becomes another place for government workers to protect their jobs and coast to retirement. It becomes a place where mini-despots act out their desires to rule and be superior to someone, anyone, but mainly those who come begging for a health procedure. It becomes anything BUT good.
Even if you're an Obama-lover, can you really expect the next batch of government types to live up to the lofty ideals being advertised by current proponents? You have to know oh skeptical ones, that those touting the "change" are often doing so for personal reasons, for personal or capitalistic gain? We've already head the leaks of power deals being made between drug companies and the Obama administration.... what haven't we heard about?
Why do people think the top echelon of AARP and the AMA are quasi-signing on while the larger part of their base is opposing the move? Come on, we know this is just another power shift. Deals are being made as I type... Although, those who are making deals to keep their power and dollars should look at history and know that the kind of promises made during power shifts are often not worth the time it took to shake hands. It's a "whatever we need to do now" mentality that rules during huge governmental change, then, when the changes happen those that helped are next in the steamroller's path.
Welfare started out as something the government, notably President Roosevelt, did to "help" during and after the Great Depression. During that period of time Social Security and unemployment compensation came into being. Those changes created generations of people completely dependent upon the government. Can anyone really say that was a good thing? Sure, it was good temporarily for those who'd hit rock bottom and those who were headed in that direction. But if they government hadn't stepped in to redistribute wealth, would we have survived? would we have been a stronger country?
What if, instead of giving hand outs to individuals, the government had given loans to businesses so people could work, have jobs, be self-sufficient? What if they had made the hand-outs temporary while creating jobs, then stopped the programs (which I believe was the original intention)? What if... there are a lot of what ifs...
Now we're in a temporary downturn and people are hurting. We'll get through it. We would have gotten through it without the 'stimulus' redistribution of our tax-dollars by Congress. Like-wise, we can also make changes in how health care is handled without having government take over any portion of the process.
Government health care will become another boondoggle program that curtails self-dependence. If the government, if Congress, is successful and mucks this one up, we will become a true nation of government-dependent weenies. We are close to going over the line from true democracy to some form of socialism, whether you want to use that label or not. Government-run or government-involved health care will be the proverbial straw that breaks American democracy's back.
Today I heard the government is digging deeper into private business, wanting the salaries and compensation info from insurance companies. Why? So they can continue their demonization and take over of private enterprise. It's a slippery, slippery slope we're on right now. Who figures out where to draw the line?
Even if you believe Obama and friends are right, that the government should offer a public option, do you trust future governmental types to run it efficiently and honestly?
The point being, you don't KNOW who's going to be making future decisions. All we really know is that once the government gets involved we have Welfare, the IRS, the Post Office, and our Medicare and Medicaid programs which are riddled with abuse and waste. No matter how good Obama and others make it sound, no matter how they vilify the current system, it's not going to be better when the government takes over. These will become the good old days for those of us who live through the transition. The next generations will only know government run health care, just like so many now only know Welfare. Scary.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Honk if I'm Paying Your Mortgage Bumper Sticker
As many of your know there is a hotly contested Congressional race happening now in New York. We have a good chance of winning the seat and the Democrats know it. They are putting everything they have into winning the race. Even if you do not live in New York, this is vital. We need every Republican seat we can get as you already know.
Make a $20 donation to Jim Tedisco's campaign and you get something we've all been talking about - a bumper sticker that says "Honk if I'm paying your mortgage" (as opposed to honk if you're paying my mortgage). It's cool looking, too. You get to help win a chance for real conservative change and you get a bumper sticker, too. Can't lose on this one.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE FROM AMERICAN FUTURE FUND POLITICAL ACTION:
***DATELINE: NEW YORK'S 20TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT***
FACT: Republican congressional candidate Jim Tedisco leads in every poll
REALITY: The gap is closing as Democrat Steve Murphy is catching up to Jim Tedisco in recent polls!
REALITY: Why is the gap closing? Because BARACK OBAMA and NANCY PELOSI are desperately misleading voters because they can't afford to lose this seat – and spending MILLIONS to defeat our Republican candidate, Jim Tedisco.
FACT: So many of you have helped by sending in contributions already, and American Future Fund Political Action is putting our full resources into his race.
Earlier this week, American Future Fund Political Action launched our most successful fundraising push to date for Jim Tedisco.
Our $20 for NY-20 campaign has raised substantial funds that will be sent directly to Jim Tedisco's congressional campaign - helping him battle the Washington liberals who are desperate to defeat him.
Will you join with conservatives across the country, and send just $20 for congressional candidate Jim Tedisco? Donate today and get a free "HONK! If I'm paying your mortgage!" bumper sticker!
To understand what is at stake, you need to be aware of the following:
This is the seat vacated by Hillary Clinton's Senate replacement. We can win it back from the hands of Democrats!
The Democrat opponent of Jim Tedisco is a great friend of ultra-liberal Sen. Charles Schumer – who will stop at nothing to get his buddy elected.
Nancy Pelosi needs this vote. If she loses even one Democratic-held seat, it will be viewed as a major loss and the start of a come-back for Republicans!
TIME IS SHORT – THE ELECTION IS JUST SIX DAYS AWAY! Will you make a difference by donating $20 for NY-20 today? If you do, you will get a free "HONK! If I'm paying your mortgage!" bumper sticker!
Thank you for your support of AFF Political Action and Jim Tedisco!
Sincerely
Tim Albrecht
American Future Fund Political Action
P.S. – The Democrats have spent millions of dollars to close the gap. We must counter their liberal money! Donate just $20 and get a FREE "HONK! If I'm paying your mortgage!" bumper sticker today!
Make a $20 donation to Jim Tedisco's campaign and you get something we've all been talking about - a bumper sticker that says "Honk if I'm paying your mortgage" (as opposed to honk if you're paying my mortgage). It's cool looking, too. You get to help win a chance for real conservative change and you get a bumper sticker, too. Can't lose on this one.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE FROM AMERICAN FUTURE FUND POLITICAL ACTION:
***DATELINE: NEW YORK'S 20TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT***
FACT: Republican congressional candidate Jim Tedisco leads in every poll
REALITY: The gap is closing as Democrat Steve Murphy is catching up to Jim Tedisco in recent polls!
REALITY: Why is the gap closing? Because BARACK OBAMA and NANCY PELOSI are desperately misleading voters because they can't afford to lose this seat – and spending MILLIONS to defeat our Republican candidate, Jim Tedisco.
FACT: So many of you have helped by sending in contributions already, and American Future Fund Political Action is putting our full resources into his race.
Earlier this week, American Future Fund Political Action launched our most successful fundraising push to date for Jim Tedisco.
Our $20 for NY-20 campaign has raised substantial funds that will be sent directly to Jim Tedisco's congressional campaign - helping him battle the Washington liberals who are desperate to defeat him.
Will you join with conservatives across the country, and send just $20 for congressional candidate Jim Tedisco? Donate today and get a free "HONK! If I'm paying your mortgage!" bumper sticker!
To understand what is at stake, you need to be aware of the following:
This is the seat vacated by Hillary Clinton's Senate replacement. We can win it back from the hands of Democrats!
The Democrat opponent of Jim Tedisco is a great friend of ultra-liberal Sen. Charles Schumer – who will stop at nothing to get his buddy elected.
Nancy Pelosi needs this vote. If she loses even one Democratic-held seat, it will be viewed as a major loss and the start of a come-back for Republicans!
TIME IS SHORT – THE ELECTION IS JUST SIX DAYS AWAY! Will you make a difference by donating $20 for NY-20 today? If you do, you will get a free "HONK! If I'm paying your mortgage!" bumper sticker!
Thank you for your support of AFF Political Action and Jim Tedisco!
Sincerely
Tim Albrecht
American Future Fund Political Action
P.S. – The Democrats have spent millions of dollars to close the gap. We must counter their liberal money! Donate just $20 and get a FREE "HONK! If I'm paying your mortgage!" bumper sticker today!
Daily Grind Editorial: Senate Should Affirm the Foxx Amendment
Last week, the House passed the “Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act” 325-105, a bill that establishes as a goal expanding national service organizations like AmeriCorps dramatically from 75,000 to 250,000. Gaining attention is an amendment to the bill inserted by Congresswoman Virginia Foxx (R-NC) that prohibits participating not-for-profit entities from using taxpayer money for lobbying, political organizing, or other political purposes.
As the legislation proceeds through the Senate, it remains to be seen if these taxpayer protections will not ultimately be stripped out. Removing the provisions would allow taxpayer-funded not-for-profit organizations participating in the national service program to, among other things, lobby Congress for yet more tax dollars.
In essence, a vote to remove the Foxx amendment is a vote to hand yet more money over to radical groups like ACORN without any consideration as to the propriety of lobbying organizations participating in a national service program. Without Congresswoman Foxx's amendment, the legislation will, without a doubt, move billions of dollars into hundreds, if not thousands, of left-leaning organizations and special interest groups.
Ultimately, the GIVE Act is a bad bill as it seeks to achieve an unnecessary purpose. Expanding national “service” via funding of non-profit entities, that just turn around to lobby government for more money, and also give millions in campaign contributions, is simply pay-to-play corruption. The organizations that give the most, get the most. This system has perpetuated for decades.
And now Mrs. Foxx may bring an end to it all.
That is why an amendment to an otherwise bad piece of legislation prohibiting individuals and organizations that participate in national service programs would at from engaging in lobbying, and also prevented from co-locating upon the same premises as organizations that lobby must be preserved. It is the least Congress can do, if the bill must pass, to protect American taxpayers who grow weary of the constant deluge of waste, fraud, and abuses by government.
However, as the bill moves through the Senate the danger exists that members will strip out the Foxx amendment, either in the Senate or in conference. The message they must hear from their constituents is that a vote against the Foxx amendment is a vote in favor of national 'service' organizations engaging in lobbying on the taxpayer's dime. It is a vote funnel tax dollars to radical organizations.
Americans for Limited Government promises to release information on campaign contributions from organizations participating in national service programs to members of Congress that vote to remove the Foxx amendment from the bill. They should consider this notice.
Members must understand that they are being watched closely, and ALG News urges news outlets to hold representatives and senators accountable for where they wind up standing on this issue. A vote to remove the Foxx amendment can only be viewed for what it is: a vote in favor of lobbying with tax dollars and against taxpayers.
ALG CTA: Please encourage your Senator not to strip the Foxx amendment out of the 'GIVE Act'. Non-profits should not use tax payer money to lobby, politically organize or support lunatic liberal causes! Your member of Congress may be reached through the Capitol Operator at 202-224-3121.
http://alg31blog.timberlakepublishing.com/default.asp?Display=1069
Bill Wilson; The Daily Grind; NetRight Nation
(Great info, highly encourage you to sign up for their updates)
As the legislation proceeds through the Senate, it remains to be seen if these taxpayer protections will not ultimately be stripped out. Removing the provisions would allow taxpayer-funded not-for-profit organizations participating in the national service program to, among other things, lobby Congress for yet more tax dollars.
In essence, a vote to remove the Foxx amendment is a vote to hand yet more money over to radical groups like ACORN without any consideration as to the propriety of lobbying organizations participating in a national service program. Without Congresswoman Foxx's amendment, the legislation will, without a doubt, move billions of dollars into hundreds, if not thousands, of left-leaning organizations and special interest groups.
Ultimately, the GIVE Act is a bad bill as it seeks to achieve an unnecessary purpose. Expanding national “service” via funding of non-profit entities, that just turn around to lobby government for more money, and also give millions in campaign contributions, is simply pay-to-play corruption. The organizations that give the most, get the most. This system has perpetuated for decades.
And now Mrs. Foxx may bring an end to it all.
That is why an amendment to an otherwise bad piece of legislation prohibiting individuals and organizations that participate in national service programs would at from engaging in lobbying, and also prevented from co-locating upon the same premises as organizations that lobby must be preserved. It is the least Congress can do, if the bill must pass, to protect American taxpayers who grow weary of the constant deluge of waste, fraud, and abuses by government.
However, as the bill moves through the Senate the danger exists that members will strip out the Foxx amendment, either in the Senate or in conference. The message they must hear from their constituents is that a vote against the Foxx amendment is a vote in favor of national 'service' organizations engaging in lobbying on the taxpayer's dime. It is a vote funnel tax dollars to radical organizations.
Americans for Limited Government promises to release information on campaign contributions from organizations participating in national service programs to members of Congress that vote to remove the Foxx amendment from the bill. They should consider this notice.
Members must understand that they are being watched closely, and ALG News urges news outlets to hold representatives and senators accountable for where they wind up standing on this issue. A vote to remove the Foxx amendment can only be viewed for what it is: a vote in favor of lobbying with tax dollars and against taxpayers.
ALG CTA: Please encourage your Senator not to strip the Foxx amendment out of the 'GIVE Act'. Non-profits should not use tax payer money to lobby, politically organize or support lunatic liberal causes! Your member of Congress may be reached through the Capitol Operator at 202-224-3121.
http://alg31blog.timberlakepublishing.com/default.asp?Display=1069
Bill Wilson; The Daily Grind; NetRight Nation
(Great info, highly encourage you to sign up for their updates)
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Whack-a-Mole Pelosi butts heads with Obama
Nancy Pelosi has this grin plastered on her face every time I see her that reminds me of The Joker most days. She is ecstatic that "she" won. Her Constitution killing agenda has been given wings and she is thrilled.
I've wondered as I watched the stimulus package zip into nightmare reality just who was pulling the strings, Obama or Pelosi and crew. It seems the power struggles between the Presidential office and Congress will continue in this administration.
Obama seems to be more centrist in some areas. However, where he is moderate, Pelosi and friends in Congress are not. Whacky Mole Pelosi is more than willing to cheerfully push through the initiatives of Obama's that she likes, usually with a few more tidbits to make his bad ideas worse. But in "exchange" for doing what she wanted to do in the first place, I'd guess she and Reid are exacting a price. Support for his agenda entails his support of her agenda.
Bottom line - we're screwed.
Pelosi butts heads with Obama
Nancy Pelosi repeatedly stood to applaud Barack Obama when he addressed a joint session of Congress Tuesday night. But in the days since, the speaker of the House has been standing up for herself — distancing herself from the president on Iraq, on tax cuts and on the prosecution of former Bush administration officials.
Pelosi’s aides say the speaker was comfortable playing the role of Obama’s shield during the stimulus fight — Republicans teed off on her rather than on the immensely popular new president — and that she remains strongly supportive of the administration on health care, energy and education reform.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/19389.html
I've wondered as I watched the stimulus package zip into nightmare reality just who was pulling the strings, Obama or Pelosi and crew. It seems the power struggles between the Presidential office and Congress will continue in this administration.
Obama seems to be more centrist in some areas. However, where he is moderate, Pelosi and friends in Congress are not. Whacky Mole Pelosi is more than willing to cheerfully push through the initiatives of Obama's that she likes, usually with a few more tidbits to make his bad ideas worse. But in "exchange" for doing what she wanted to do in the first place, I'd guess she and Reid are exacting a price. Support for his agenda entails his support of her agenda.
Bottom line - we're screwed.
Pelosi butts heads with Obama
Nancy Pelosi repeatedly stood to applaud Barack Obama when he addressed a joint session of Congress Tuesday night. But in the days since, the speaker of the House has been standing up for herself — distancing herself from the president on Iraq, on tax cuts and on the prosecution of former Bush administration officials.
Pelosi’s aides say the speaker was comfortable playing the role of Obama’s shield during the stimulus fight — Republicans teed off on her rather than on the immensely popular new president — and that she remains strongly supportive of the administration on health care, energy and education reform.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/19389.html
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Karl Rove: Obama's Straw Men
As always, excellent insights and clarity from Karl Rove:
President Barack Obama reveres Abraham Lincoln. But among the glaring differences between the two men is that Lincoln offered careful, rigorous, sustained arguments to advance his aims and, when disagreeing with political opponents, rarely relied on the lazy rhetorical device of "straw men." Mr. Obama, on the other hand, routinely ascribes to others views they don't espouse and says opposition to his policies is grounded in views no one really advocates.
On Tuesday night, Mr. Obama told Congress and the nation, "I reject the view that . . . says government has no role in laying the foundation for our common prosperity." Who exactly has that view? Certainly not congressional Republicans, who believe that through reasonable tax cuts, fiscal restraint, and prudent monetary policies government contributes to prosperity...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561484923478287.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
President Barack Obama reveres Abraham Lincoln. But among the glaring differences between the two men is that Lincoln offered careful, rigorous, sustained arguments to advance his aims and, when disagreeing with political opponents, rarely relied on the lazy rhetorical device of "straw men." Mr. Obama, on the other hand, routinely ascribes to others views they don't espouse and says opposition to his policies is grounded in views no one really advocates.
On Tuesday night, Mr. Obama told Congress and the nation, "I reject the view that . . . says government has no role in laying the foundation for our common prosperity." Who exactly has that view? Certainly not congressional Republicans, who believe that through reasonable tax cuts, fiscal restraint, and prudent monetary policies government contributes to prosperity...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561484923478287.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Heritage Foundation: The Oath and the District of Columbia
The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States ... No Person shall be a Representative who shall not ... when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.- Article I of the United States Constitution
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.- Article VI of the United States Constitution
For all of its many ambiguities, on the matter of whether the residents of the District of Columbia can vote in the House of Representatives, the United States Constitution is crystal clear: no.
In 2000 the United States District Court for the District of Columbia affirmed this truth, writing: "The Constitution does not contemplate that the District may serve as a state for purposes of the apportionment of congressional representatives."
The Supreme Court later affirmed that decision.Despite the clarity of the law, Senate leaders have scheduled a vote today on S. 160, which would create two new seats in the House of Representatives and give one of them to the District of Columbia. The new fig leaf the left is using to push this blatantly unconstitutional measure is the argument that Art.1 sec. 8's grant to Congress to exercise "exclusive Legislation" over the District, gives them the power to grant the District a seat in the House. Heritage fellow Hans von Spakovsky exposes how specious this claim is:
The Constitution’s provision giving Congress the power to run the affairs of the District of Columbia — the seat of the nation’s capitol — doesn’t wipe out other parts of the document. Congress could not, for example, restrict the First Amendment rights of District residents.
Furthermore, the very same section of the Constitution also applies to “Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards” and other federal properties. But it would be ridiculous to assert, on the basis of that text, that Congress has the power to award House seats to an army base, federal office building, or Navy pier.
Conservatives are not alone in pointing out what a blatant violation of the Constitution S. 160 would be. Liberal constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley writes:
It would be ridiculous to suggest that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention or ratification conventions would have worked out such specific and exacting rules for the composition of Congress, only to give the majority of Congress the right to create a new form of voting members from federal enclaves like the District.
It would have constituted the realization of the worst fears for many delegates, particularly Anti-Federalists, to have an open-ended ability of the majority to manipulate the rolls of Congress and to use areas under the exclusive control of the federal government as the source for new voting members.
Some Senators appear to believe they can in good conscience vote for explicitly unconstitutional legislation if they include a provision in the bill that allows a Member of Congress to challenge the law in court. But such a provision would only clear statutory standing. Any plaintiff would also have to muster constitutional standing and as Heritage scholars Andrew Grossman and Nathaniel Ward detail, Congress has the power to play political games with voting in the House to prevent such a suit from ever happening.
Members of Congress take an oath to defend the Constitution. This makes them duty bound to oppose any legislation that is unconstitutional. It would be a black eye on the entire Congress if they chose political expediency over their solemn promise to the American people.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.- Article VI of the United States Constitution
For all of its many ambiguities, on the matter of whether the residents of the District of Columbia can vote in the House of Representatives, the United States Constitution is crystal clear: no.
In 2000 the United States District Court for the District of Columbia affirmed this truth, writing: "The Constitution does not contemplate that the District may serve as a state for purposes of the apportionment of congressional representatives."
The Supreme Court later affirmed that decision.Despite the clarity of the law, Senate leaders have scheduled a vote today on S. 160, which would create two new seats in the House of Representatives and give one of them to the District of Columbia. The new fig leaf the left is using to push this blatantly unconstitutional measure is the argument that Art.1 sec. 8's grant to Congress to exercise "exclusive Legislation" over the District, gives them the power to grant the District a seat in the House. Heritage fellow Hans von Spakovsky exposes how specious this claim is:
The Constitution’s provision giving Congress the power to run the affairs of the District of Columbia — the seat of the nation’s capitol — doesn’t wipe out other parts of the document. Congress could not, for example, restrict the First Amendment rights of District residents.
Furthermore, the very same section of the Constitution also applies to “Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards” and other federal properties. But it would be ridiculous to assert, on the basis of that text, that Congress has the power to award House seats to an army base, federal office building, or Navy pier.
Conservatives are not alone in pointing out what a blatant violation of the Constitution S. 160 would be. Liberal constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley writes:
It would be ridiculous to suggest that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention or ratification conventions would have worked out such specific and exacting rules for the composition of Congress, only to give the majority of Congress the right to create a new form of voting members from federal enclaves like the District.
It would have constituted the realization of the worst fears for many delegates, particularly Anti-Federalists, to have an open-ended ability of the majority to manipulate the rolls of Congress and to use areas under the exclusive control of the federal government as the source for new voting members.
Some Senators appear to believe they can in good conscience vote for explicitly unconstitutional legislation if they include a provision in the bill that allows a Member of Congress to challenge the law in court. But such a provision would only clear statutory standing. Any plaintiff would also have to muster constitutional standing and as Heritage scholars Andrew Grossman and Nathaniel Ward detail, Congress has the power to play political games with voting in the House to prevent such a suit from ever happening.
Members of Congress take an oath to defend the Constitution. This makes them duty bound to oppose any legislation that is unconstitutional. It would be a black eye on the entire Congress if they chose political expediency over their solemn promise to the American people.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Wake Up America on the Stimulus
Wake Up America movement is an all volunteer non-partisan grass roots network, as many of you know. A core team of volunteers have diligently examined the contents of the current bill before Congress - HR1. What we have learned about what's happening in Washington is no less than astonishing.
TAKE THE TIME TO READ THIS NOW
Your Future may depend on it. Once you do, you may think this is all too incredible to be true. SO COME SEE IT FOR YOURSELF at WAKE UP AMERICA WEBSITE
We have posted the entire HR-1 in exclusive downloadable form for signed in Volunteers, like yourself. W.A.M. also has opened a special page on website to see specific excerpts of
THE BIGGEST SWINDLE IN HISTORY!
YOU DESERVE TO KNOW THE TRUTH - and EVERYONE you know should also BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING FACTS:
1. HR1 opens with a positive sounding statement about its contents being only for the purposes of immediate actions to support economic recovery. THIS IS NOT SO! As a hint of some of what's to come in its SIX HUNDRED AND FORTY SEVEN pages - its introductory statement immediately switches the subject to the (very complicated) terms of the GRANT MONEY that it contains. Have you ever heard of an economy in crisis being saved by the circulation of funds being poured into GRANT MONEY?!
2. As reported on FOX news briefly, the presumed organizer of this self-destructive volume of insanity, is Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, whose own son stands to gain millions in government investment if this measure passes. But THAT is only a drop in the bucket of pork barrel spending included in HR-1. But here is what's worse: The purpose of the bill's high volume of self-serving sub-clauses (each adding MILLIONS OF DOLLARS MORE in non-economic emergency expenditures) is for one end: to BUY THE VOTE of every Congressman required for HR-1 passage! This Obama strategy for bribing public officials is nothing new. He has used it successfully - with Axelrod's help - throughout his rapid-fire rise to power. Here is the REAL REASON for buying up Congressional votes at this critical time:
3. HR-1 is ONLY THE FIRST in a package of TEN BILLS preparing to be launched in our Congress. Together they represent the obliteration of the American way of life as we have known it. As the public knows T.A.R.P. BILLIONS came first - and is already being shown NOT TO IMPROVE THE ECONOMY. They are claiming that's because it's just "not enough." Any logical criticism of HR-1 is now also being brushed aside on the basis "We know it's not perfect but we need to do something FAST."
4. Each of these TEN PIECES OF DESTRUCTIVE and COSTLY LEGISLATION has a politically correct sounding Title. Together these form a body of nearly-irreversible SOCIALISM and their underlying intention is clear: Flood so much currency and power into the hands of Obama's supporters that the influence of his backers becomes an unstoppable political machine pursuing its own agenda - and its agenda does NOT serve We the People it is supposed to represent!
5. This currently unreported package of TEN BILLS are under the vast umbrella of the "Obama Economic Recovery Plan." The strategy is simple, really: to manipulate the emotions of the American public and orchestrate the purse strings of Congress - all FALSELY DISGUISED as necessary to improve our current plight. Notice how the Media has stopped talking about the "bail-out" and is now using the term "Stimulus Plan." When the next bill package comes up for a rapid-fire slam-dunk, they'll just call that one by a different name and so on and so on.
6. Which brings us to the most critical question: WHO IS REALLY WRITING ALL THIS LEGISLATION that will affect our families for generations to come? On January 7, 2008: The 10 Bill Package of "Obama Economic Recovery Plan" was introduced in the House of Representatives. On January 14, 2008 each of these Bills was no more than a few paragraphs in length - with appealing Titles followed by a few vague sentences. That's all there was! Yet, before January ended the OPENING PIECE OF LEGISLATION - HR1 mushroomed to 647 pages long! Ask yourself: How could Congress possibly have written much material on so many sweeping topics in just a few weeks? Then go on to the bigger question: Who in our House of Representatives actually read every page in this bill - and studied the use of the BILLIONS of Dollars being handed out throughout these pages? IT IS OBVIOUS THE HOUSE PASSED THIS BILL ONTO THE SENATE WITHOUT ACTUALLY READING IT - and quite possibly NOT having authored it in Congress itself!!!
HERE IS A BREAKDOWN OF WHAT YOU MOST NEED TO KNOW ABOUT HR1 before it becomes the LAW OF THE LAND:
Despite Obama's statement that "less than 1%" of this bill includes costs unrelated to economic urgency, MOST HR-1 CONTENTS HAVE NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH RESOLVING THE ECONOMIC CRISES. Everyone willing to Vote It In is earmarked to get a piece of the pie for their own special interests.
These billions in pay-offs- built into HR! - are covering up subcategories within the legislation designed exclusively for Obama's self serving political ends- individually and collectively they threaten our usual rights as citizens in a free Republic. These include:
- Massive funding of ACORN, despite the fact that the organization is under indictment in at least 12 states!
- Additional funding for another Obama campaigning arm - under the guise of support for the Analog to Digital conversion
- A huge volume of surreptitious GRANT funding to be distributed for questionable purposes of an extended period of time.
- Enormous bundled funding for "technology advances" (to improve outreach of propaganda and invasions of privacy.)
- Unbelievable extravagances in the upgrades of federal buildings and vehicles completely contradictory to our emergency status.
LAST, BUT FAR FROM LEAST: over ALMOST TWO HUNDRED PAGES of new Laws & Government Expenditures to NATIONALIZE the records of all Health Care providers into ONE DATA BASE which requires every American's Health Records be accessible to ANY who have access to said DATA BASE. This measure also refers to usage of the database by the federal government for BIO-SURVEILLANCE.
To do something about the dangerous insanity currently overtaking CAPITOL HILL sign in to help Wake Up America - GET INVOLVED
To better inform others you know whose lives will also be effected by HR-1, forward them the following link: THE NEW CONGRESS
TAKE THE TIME TO READ THIS NOW
Your Future may depend on it. Once you do, you may think this is all too incredible to be true. SO COME SEE IT FOR YOURSELF at WAKE UP AMERICA WEBSITE
We have posted the entire HR-1 in exclusive downloadable form for signed in Volunteers, like yourself. W.A.M. also has opened a special page on website to see specific excerpts of
THE BIGGEST SWINDLE IN HISTORY!
YOU DESERVE TO KNOW THE TRUTH - and EVERYONE you know should also BE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWING FACTS:
1. HR1 opens with a positive sounding statement about its contents being only for the purposes of immediate actions to support economic recovery. THIS IS NOT SO! As a hint of some of what's to come in its SIX HUNDRED AND FORTY SEVEN pages - its introductory statement immediately switches the subject to the (very complicated) terms of the GRANT MONEY that it contains. Have you ever heard of an economy in crisis being saved by the circulation of funds being poured into GRANT MONEY?!
2. As reported on FOX news briefly, the presumed organizer of this self-destructive volume of insanity, is Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, whose own son stands to gain millions in government investment if this measure passes. But THAT is only a drop in the bucket of pork barrel spending included in HR-1. But here is what's worse: The purpose of the bill's high volume of self-serving sub-clauses (each adding MILLIONS OF DOLLARS MORE in non-economic emergency expenditures) is for one end: to BUY THE VOTE of every Congressman required for HR-1 passage! This Obama strategy for bribing public officials is nothing new. He has used it successfully - with Axelrod's help - throughout his rapid-fire rise to power. Here is the REAL REASON for buying up Congressional votes at this critical time:
3. HR-1 is ONLY THE FIRST in a package of TEN BILLS preparing to be launched in our Congress. Together they represent the obliteration of the American way of life as we have known it. As the public knows T.A.R.P. BILLIONS came first - and is already being shown NOT TO IMPROVE THE ECONOMY. They are claiming that's because it's just "not enough." Any logical criticism of HR-1 is now also being brushed aside on the basis "We know it's not perfect but we need to do something FAST."
4. Each of these TEN PIECES OF DESTRUCTIVE and COSTLY LEGISLATION has a politically correct sounding Title. Together these form a body of nearly-irreversible SOCIALISM and their underlying intention is clear: Flood so much currency and power into the hands of Obama's supporters that the influence of his backers becomes an unstoppable political machine pursuing its own agenda - and its agenda does NOT serve We the People it is supposed to represent!
5. This currently unreported package of TEN BILLS are under the vast umbrella of the "Obama Economic Recovery Plan." The strategy is simple, really: to manipulate the emotions of the American public and orchestrate the purse strings of Congress - all FALSELY DISGUISED as necessary to improve our current plight. Notice how the Media has stopped talking about the "bail-out" and is now using the term "Stimulus Plan." When the next bill package comes up for a rapid-fire slam-dunk, they'll just call that one by a different name and so on and so on.
6. Which brings us to the most critical question: WHO IS REALLY WRITING ALL THIS LEGISLATION that will affect our families for generations to come? On January 7, 2008: The 10 Bill Package of "Obama Economic Recovery Plan" was introduced in the House of Representatives. On January 14, 2008 each of these Bills was no more than a few paragraphs in length - with appealing Titles followed by a few vague sentences. That's all there was! Yet, before January ended the OPENING PIECE OF LEGISLATION - HR1 mushroomed to 647 pages long! Ask yourself: How could Congress possibly have written much material on so many sweeping topics in just a few weeks? Then go on to the bigger question: Who in our House of Representatives actually read every page in this bill - and studied the use of the BILLIONS of Dollars being handed out throughout these pages? IT IS OBVIOUS THE HOUSE PASSED THIS BILL ONTO THE SENATE WITHOUT ACTUALLY READING IT - and quite possibly NOT having authored it in Congress itself!!!
HERE IS A BREAKDOWN OF WHAT YOU MOST NEED TO KNOW ABOUT HR1 before it becomes the LAW OF THE LAND:
Despite Obama's statement that "less than 1%" of this bill includes costs unrelated to economic urgency, MOST HR-1 CONTENTS HAVE NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH RESOLVING THE ECONOMIC CRISES. Everyone willing to Vote It In is earmarked to get a piece of the pie for their own special interests.
These billions in pay-offs- built into HR! - are covering up subcategories within the legislation designed exclusively for Obama's self serving political ends- individually and collectively they threaten our usual rights as citizens in a free Republic. These include:
- Massive funding of ACORN, despite the fact that the organization is under indictment in at least 12 states!
- Additional funding for another Obama campaigning arm - under the guise of support for the Analog to Digital conversion
- A huge volume of surreptitious GRANT funding to be distributed for questionable purposes of an extended period of time.
- Enormous bundled funding for "technology advances" (to improve outreach of propaganda and invasions of privacy.)
- Unbelievable extravagances in the upgrades of federal buildings and vehicles completely contradictory to our emergency status.
LAST, BUT FAR FROM LEAST: over ALMOST TWO HUNDRED PAGES of new Laws & Government Expenditures to NATIONALIZE the records of all Health Care providers into ONE DATA BASE which requires every American's Health Records be accessible to ANY who have access to said DATA BASE. This measure also refers to usage of the database by the federal government for BIO-SURVEILLANCE.
To do something about the dangerous insanity currently overtaking CAPITOL HILL sign in to help Wake Up America - GET INVOLVED
To better inform others you know whose lives will also be effected by HR-1, forward them the following link: THE NEW CONGRESS
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Georgia's Isakson Questions BHO's Sec Labor on Union's Secret Ballot
If the Unions have their way with taking away worker's rights to vote via secret ballot, we may as well throw in the towel. We will ultimately be a unionized nation of workers, unable to compete on any reasonable level with other countries. The Unions will be another arm of government without any of the meager restrictions that currently hamper our politicians.
I see the new regime chipping away at the foundation of our country from so many angles it's virtually impossible decide where to focus. It's death by inches. We focus on trying to fight the un-"Fairness Doctrine" and they inch forward on the "Employee Free Choice Act" (how much time went into choosing the names of that misleading moniker?). We focus on the monumental problems with the economy while they inch forward with unqualified or far-far-left cabinet appointments. While we focus on national issues our local governments stick out their hands for money, happily agreeing to comply with all the Federal strings attached.
I'm not one to get discouraged, but I can already tell that the next few years are going to test every positive bone in my body.
Our Georgia elected representatives seem to be, for the most part, conservative. I don't agree with everything they've signed onto or supported. In fact, if we had good viable, conservative choices in a few cases, I'd cast my vote in that direction. However, overall the Republican's seem to have the right views.
U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson (R-GA) sent this release out Friday. Although many of you aren't in Georgia, I think you'll find it interesting reading.
Isakson Pushes Labor Nominee to Oppose Eliminating Workers’ Rights to Secret Ballot in Choosing Whether to Unionize
Isakson Notes Nominee’s Previous Support of Secret Ballot for Workers in Negotiating Flex Time
1/9/09 WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., today questioned why President-elect Obama’s nominee for Secretary of Labor supports legislation to strip workers of their right to a secret ballot when deciding whether to unionize, but previously insisted on a secret ballot for workers during negotiations with management on flex time.
The nominee, U.S. Rep. Hilda Solis of California, voted for legislation to strip workers of the secret ballot when deciding whether to unionize in 2007, but pushed legislation in the California Legislature in the late 1990s in which she insisted that workers have the secret ballot when negotiating with management on flex time and overtime pay.
“You insisted that there be a vote by all employees and that it be by secret ballot. Why would we want to change the law of the United States now with regard to how unions are organized and eliminate the secret ballot?” Isakson said to Solis during her hearing this morning in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.
Solis responded to Isakson this morning that she was not prepared to make a statement about her position on the secret ballot at this time.
Isakson strongly opposes the so-called Employee Free Choice Act, also known as Card Check, which would eliminate the rights of workers to participate in a secret-ballot election in order to certify the creation of a union. The legislation would force employees to make a public declaration of their preference by allowing union organizers to bypass elections if a majority of employees sign cards authorizing a union.
The legislation passed the U.S. House in 2007 and is expected to be brought forth by Democratic leaders for a vote in the Senate this year.
Isakson believes the current system, which allows employees to use a secret ballot in choosing whether they want a union to become their exclusive representative in the workplace, has worked well because it neither advocates nor discourages unionization.
Isakson blamed declining union membership as the motive behind the legislation, which did not receive committee consideration. Union membership among private sector employees is at its lowest level in decades.
Isakson also used the nomination hearing for Solis to stress the importance of writing regulations that both protect workers and allow businesses to operate efficiently.
“In my four years on this committee as the Republican leader on the Employment and Workplace Safety Subcommittee, I have worked with Senators Murray, Kennedy, Enzi and others to try and strike this delicate balance,” Isakson said. “We have a strong record of working together on critical issues to American workers such as mine safety reform, banning asbestos, and pension protection.”
I see the new regime chipping away at the foundation of our country from so many angles it's virtually impossible decide where to focus. It's death by inches. We focus on trying to fight the un-"Fairness Doctrine" and they inch forward on the "Employee Free Choice Act" (how much time went into choosing the names of that misleading moniker?). We focus on the monumental problems with the economy while they inch forward with unqualified or far-far-left cabinet appointments. While we focus on national issues our local governments stick out their hands for money, happily agreeing to comply with all the Federal strings attached.
I'm not one to get discouraged, but I can already tell that the next few years are going to test every positive bone in my body.
Our Georgia elected representatives seem to be, for the most part, conservative. I don't agree with everything they've signed onto or supported. In fact, if we had good viable, conservative choices in a few cases, I'd cast my vote in that direction. However, overall the Republican's seem to have the right views.
U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson (R-GA) sent this release out Friday. Although many of you aren't in Georgia, I think you'll find it interesting reading.
Isakson Pushes Labor Nominee to Oppose Eliminating Workers’ Rights to Secret Ballot in Choosing Whether to Unionize
Isakson Notes Nominee’s Previous Support of Secret Ballot for Workers in Negotiating Flex Time
1/9/09 WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., today questioned why President-elect Obama’s nominee for Secretary of Labor supports legislation to strip workers of their right to a secret ballot when deciding whether to unionize, but previously insisted on a secret ballot for workers during negotiations with management on flex time.
The nominee, U.S. Rep. Hilda Solis of California, voted for legislation to strip workers of the secret ballot when deciding whether to unionize in 2007, but pushed legislation in the California Legislature in the late 1990s in which she insisted that workers have the secret ballot when negotiating with management on flex time and overtime pay.
“You insisted that there be a vote by all employees and that it be by secret ballot. Why would we want to change the law of the United States now with regard to how unions are organized and eliminate the secret ballot?” Isakson said to Solis during her hearing this morning in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.
Solis responded to Isakson this morning that she was not prepared to make a statement about her position on the secret ballot at this time.
Isakson strongly opposes the so-called Employee Free Choice Act, also known as Card Check, which would eliminate the rights of workers to participate in a secret-ballot election in order to certify the creation of a union. The legislation would force employees to make a public declaration of their preference by allowing union organizers to bypass elections if a majority of employees sign cards authorizing a union.
The legislation passed the U.S. House in 2007 and is expected to be brought forth by Democratic leaders for a vote in the Senate this year.
Isakson believes the current system, which allows employees to use a secret ballot in choosing whether they want a union to become their exclusive representative in the workplace, has worked well because it neither advocates nor discourages unionization.
Isakson blamed declining union membership as the motive behind the legislation, which did not receive committee consideration. Union membership among private sector employees is at its lowest level in decades.
Isakson also used the nomination hearing for Solis to stress the importance of writing regulations that both protect workers and allow businesses to operate efficiently.
“In my four years on this committee as the Republican leader on the Employment and Workplace Safety Subcommittee, I have worked with Senators Murray, Kennedy, Enzi and others to try and strike this delicate balance,” Isakson said. “We have a strong record of working together on critical issues to American workers such as mine safety reform, banning asbestos, and pension protection.”
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Update on Bizarro Fairness Doctrine
Hat tip to BKPundit (Twitter & freerepublic.com)!
GOP Legislators Vow to Fight Reinstitution of Fairness Doctrine with Introduction of Broadcaster Freedom Act
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.: 'We are not going to allow this rule to be reenacted either by the FCC, by the Obama administration or by Congress.'
In the midst of economic troubles and much anticipation of a new administration about to enter the White House, the potential return of the Fairness Doctrine hasn’t gotten much attention. But on the eve of President-elect Barack Obama’s inauguration, Republican members of Congress haven’t forgotten. GOP Sens. Jim DeMint, S.C. and James Inhofe, Okla., along with two of their House colleagues, Reps. Mike Pence, Ind. and Greg Walden, Ore., introduced the Broadcaster Freedom Act at a press conference in the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 7.
http://businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090107194709.aspx
(another thanks to BKPundit 'cause I'm now signed up for updates from Business & Media!)
GOP Legislators Vow to Fight Reinstitution of Fairness Doctrine with Introduction of Broadcaster Freedom Act
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.: 'We are not going to allow this rule to be reenacted either by the FCC, by the Obama administration or by Congress.'
In the midst of economic troubles and much anticipation of a new administration about to enter the White House, the potential return of the Fairness Doctrine hasn’t gotten much attention. But on the eve of President-elect Barack Obama’s inauguration, Republican members of Congress haven’t forgotten. GOP Sens. Jim DeMint, S.C. and James Inhofe, Okla., along with two of their House colleagues, Reps. Mike Pence, Ind. and Greg Walden, Ore., introduced the Broadcaster Freedom Act at a press conference in the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 7.
http://businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090107194709.aspx
(another thanks to BKPundit 'cause I'm now signed up for updates from Business & Media!)
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
McConnell Says No "Wednesday" Auto Bailout Vote
Don't you get the feeling it's a done deal and all we're hearing is the politicians trying to cya when you read the articles and hear the words?
Let's see if I remember correctly... the LAST bailout it was 'gee we have to do it now now now now...' can't wait... rush... rush... including Mitch McConnell. Glad he's slowing this one down, but methinks that's all he be doin' and it's simply to look strong so the bite isn't too bad when it hits at the ballot box (assuming it does, we voters suffer mightily from short memoryitis).
Now we have the benefit of hindsight to know how badly the last bailout was handled and is being handled. Now we know where we're heading as we hand over capitalism, free market and our future monies to the government.
Don't want this bailout. Didn't want the last one. Don't you feel powerless when you see the end of the world and no one is able to stop it?
McConnell: Bailout votes aren't there
The auto industry bailout politics are a mess this morning. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday that Republicans are not prepared to back the massive auto-bailout package being negotiated by the White House and congressional Democrats. McConnell would not allow Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to expedite consideration of the bill, setting up a key procedural vote Friday morning.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1208/McConnell_Bailout_votes_arent_there.html
Talks press ahead in Congress for auto industry bailout
WASHINGTON (AFP) – Lawmakers Wednesday battled over a 15-billion-dollar bailout for the stalled US auto industry amid lingering Republican doubts that the jumpstart is more than a quick fix. A possible vote on the package in the House of Representatives could come as soon as Wednesday afternoon. Senator Carl Levin from Michigan, the base for the auto industry, said he understands that an "agreement has been reached," and that it was only a matter of time before a bill was ready for a vote...
.... Yet Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said there would be no vote Wednesday.
"Let me be clear: there will be no vote on this legislation today. On a bill this critical, with so much taxpayer money at stake, we cannot rush this through without adequate review," he said in a statement, adding: "We will address this issue before the end of the week."...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081210/bs_afp/usautoeconomypolitics_081210164803
Let's see if I remember correctly... the LAST bailout it was 'gee we have to do it now now now now...' can't wait... rush... rush... including Mitch McConnell. Glad he's slowing this one down, but methinks that's all he be doin' and it's simply to look strong so the bite isn't too bad when it hits at the ballot box (assuming it does, we voters suffer mightily from short memoryitis).
Now we have the benefit of hindsight to know how badly the last bailout was handled and is being handled. Now we know where we're heading as we hand over capitalism, free market and our future monies to the government.
Don't want this bailout. Didn't want the last one. Don't you feel powerless when you see the end of the world and no one is able to stop it?
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Obama Birth Certificate Issue / Update
Linda Shaw rocks! She is doing such a fantastic job of keeping us posted on this issue! Did you see where the Kenyan government is either going to or is debating putting up a shrine at what they say is Obama's BIRTH PLACE in Kenya? Those folks are just swollen with pride that one of their natural born citizens has grown up to be President of the United States... I'll go back and find the story on that one for you, post it later.
---
You already have been sent info on contacting Congress. Here is a letter you can use. It takes into account info from the Berg (1st) and Keys (the latest) lawsuit.
This can happen but it is a fight to the finish. I know some do not believe in doing it but if Keyes is successful, which I think he has the better shot than any of them, then things will go from there. If you have not read Keyes lawsuit yet, you are missing out as he covers all that others did not and actually gives cases in the past that the SOS did take someone off the ballot after verification proving it is their job.
I would appreciate you passing it on to others in case they would like to participate.
- Linda
Date
The Honorable (full name)(Room #) (Name)
Senate Office Building
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear (Senator) (Representative)
Our Founding Fathers placed in the Constitution restrictions on who could be the Vice President and Commander-in-Chief. There is a potential danger and risk that could be brought about by a national leader with possible divided loyalties and personal entanglements in foreign lands. Therefore, it was deemed wise to restrict those posts to natural-born individuals without dual citizenships. The 20th amendment identifies the time prior to inauguration for objections to be made to the qualifications of Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates. In this missive, a clear unimpeachable argument is made that Barack Obama has yet to provide support for the proposition that he meets that Constitutional bar.
Despite much public demand, Mr. Obama has not provided access to a vault Birth Certificate proving his actual place of birth. Moreover, the “short form” evidence released by the Obama campaign purporting to be a “Certification of Live Birth” on its face appears to be of questionable authenticity. The question of the authenticity is really moot as the real problem is it does not address any of the detail required to answer the question of actual place of birth.
The press release issued on October 31, 2008, by the Hawaii Department of Health regarding Obama's original birth certificate fails to resolve any of the questions raised in litigation since Hawaii has two types of original birth certificates. Therefore, the only way to verify the exact location of birth is to review a certified copy or¿¿ the original vault Certificate of Live Birth and compare the name of the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor against the birthing records on file at the hospital noted on the Certificate of the Live Birth.
An often-asked question: Why Is his birth location important since his mother was a U.S. citizen?
The residency requirements for the US citizen parent are different than today, Section 301(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended, would be in effect at the time of Mr. Obama’s birth in 1961. Based on this law, if Barack Obama was born outside the US or its Outlying Possessions, on August 4, 1961, then Ms. Dunham could not transmit her citizenship to her son because she failed to have accumulated the necessary physical presence requirements that the LAW demanded.
It is that simple. If he was born in Kenya, then he is not, nor can he ever be eligible to hold the office of President of the United States of America, inasmuch as he does not, nor can he ever, fulfill the requirements of Article II, Clause V, of the Constitution of the United States. Now, the question remains to be answered if he was born in Kenya or not.
If he was born in Hawaii, there are other obstacles to Senator Obama’s eligibility. Mr. Obama, in and about 1967, moved to Indonesia. took the last name of his stepfather, Soetoro, and was registered at school by the name Barry Soetoro showing citizenship as Indonesian. This creates complications with dual-citizenship. During that time, Indonesia did not recognize dual-citizenship and the U.S. only recognized when the other country did. It was also prohibited by the Hague Convention of 1930, as interfering with the internal affairs of another sovereign Country. This brings into question whether or not Mr. Obama went to the then current immigration procedures to regain the U.S. citizenship. Since Mr. Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981, when there was a ban for U.S. citizens to travel to Pakistan, it leads us to believe that he did not go through the process to regain his U.S. citizenship. Even if he had done so, he would be considered a naturalized citizen and not a “natural born” citizen.
It is your duty to uphold the constitution. Therefore, we the citizens of the United States ask that you initiate a congressional investigation and demand documentary proof that Senator Obama is a “natural born” citizen of the United States of America. This proof could include items such as his original birth certificate, showing the name of the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor, all of his passports with immigration stamps, and verification from the governments where the candidate has resided, verifying that he did not, and does not, hold citizenship of these countries, or any other documents that certify an individual’s citizenship and/or qualification for office.
Although there have been questions for months about Mr.Obama’s eligibility, the first lawsuit was filed on August 21, 2008. What is troubling and frustrating is that the questions could have easily been answered by Mr. Obama. However, he has refused to provide his vault birth certificate. Why would he not want to provide it?
Senator Obama could be compromised if he is not a natural born citizen, which means our country is compromised. The secret briefings he is now receiving should stop immediately. This citizenship issue could resurface during an Obama presidency. If he has ever presented himself as a US citizen or with dual citizenship, during international travel and/or on official applications for any institution such as a university, other people will know (or find out) about it. He might be vulnerable to domestic or foreign blackmail, or pressed for favors, which are not in the best interests of the average American.
We ask you again, as concerned citizens and patriots, to launch an investigation or to file a challenge against the electors who will vote on December 15th. Failure to grant this request to verify the constitutionally required qualifications of Senator Obama not only allows, but promotes, an overwhelming degree of disrespect for our Constitution and for our electoral process, would allow a potentially corrupted, fraudulent, nomination and election process to continue.
For Constitutional government,
(your signature)
(your name)
A Friend of the Court and a citizen of the United States of America
(your address)
(your phone number)
(your email address)
For further information contact:
Philip J. Berg, Esquire555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531Cell (610) 662-3005(610) 825-3134(800) 993-PHIL [7445]Fax (610) 834-7659philjberg@obamacrimes.com
Reference for your review:
PA Philip J. Berg lawsuit: all documents
http://www.obamacrimes.com/index.php/component/finder/search?q=court+documents+attached
CA Ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes; Dr. Wiley S. Drake, Sr.; Markham Robinson lawsuit http://americamustknow.com/Documents/Final%20writ%20Keyes%20v%20Bowen.pdf
Current Washington Times Ad running regarding Obama’s citizenship
http://www.obamacrimes.com/attachments/065_Obama%20Crimes%20Ad%20-%20Wash%20Times%2020081117.pdf
Obama's Birth Certificate Verified By State
http://www.kitv.com/politics/17860890/detail.html?rss=hon&psp=news
---
You already have been sent info on contacting Congress. Here is a letter you can use. It takes into account info from the Berg (1st) and Keys (the latest) lawsuit.
This can happen but it is a fight to the finish. I know some do not believe in doing it but if Keyes is successful, which I think he has the better shot than any of them, then things will go from there. If you have not read Keyes lawsuit yet, you are missing out as he covers all that others did not and actually gives cases in the past that the SOS did take someone off the ballot after verification proving it is their job.
I would appreciate you passing it on to others in case they would like to participate.
- Linda
Date
The Honorable (full name)(Room #) (Name)
Senate Office Building
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear (Senator) (Representative)
Our Founding Fathers placed in the Constitution restrictions on who could be the Vice President and Commander-in-Chief. There is a potential danger and risk that could be brought about by a national leader with possible divided loyalties and personal entanglements in foreign lands. Therefore, it was deemed wise to restrict those posts to natural-born individuals without dual citizenships. The 20th amendment identifies the time prior to inauguration for objections to be made to the qualifications of Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates. In this missive, a clear unimpeachable argument is made that Barack Obama has yet to provide support for the proposition that he meets that Constitutional bar.
Despite much public demand, Mr. Obama has not provided access to a vault Birth Certificate proving his actual place of birth. Moreover, the “short form” evidence released by the Obama campaign purporting to be a “Certification of Live Birth” on its face appears to be of questionable authenticity. The question of the authenticity is really moot as the real problem is it does not address any of the detail required to answer the question of actual place of birth.
The press release issued on October 31, 2008, by the Hawaii Department of Health regarding Obama's original birth certificate fails to resolve any of the questions raised in litigation since Hawaii has two types of original birth certificates. Therefore, the only way to verify the exact location of birth is to review a certified copy or¿¿ the original vault Certificate of Live Birth and compare the name of the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor against the birthing records on file at the hospital noted on the Certificate of the Live Birth.
An often-asked question: Why Is his birth location important since his mother was a U.S. citizen?
The residency requirements for the US citizen parent are different than today, Section 301(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended, would be in effect at the time of Mr. Obama’s birth in 1961. Based on this law, if Barack Obama was born outside the US or its Outlying Possessions, on August 4, 1961, then Ms. Dunham could not transmit her citizenship to her son because she failed to have accumulated the necessary physical presence requirements that the LAW demanded.
It is that simple. If he was born in Kenya, then he is not, nor can he ever be eligible to hold the office of President of the United States of America, inasmuch as he does not, nor can he ever, fulfill the requirements of Article II, Clause V, of the Constitution of the United States. Now, the question remains to be answered if he was born in Kenya or not.
If he was born in Hawaii, there are other obstacles to Senator Obama’s eligibility. Mr. Obama, in and about 1967, moved to Indonesia. took the last name of his stepfather, Soetoro, and was registered at school by the name Barry Soetoro showing citizenship as Indonesian. This creates complications with dual-citizenship. During that time, Indonesia did not recognize dual-citizenship and the U.S. only recognized when the other country did. It was also prohibited by the Hague Convention of 1930, as interfering with the internal affairs of another sovereign Country. This brings into question whether or not Mr. Obama went to the then current immigration procedures to regain the U.S. citizenship. Since Mr. Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981, when there was a ban for U.S. citizens to travel to Pakistan, it leads us to believe that he did not go through the process to regain his U.S. citizenship. Even if he had done so, he would be considered a naturalized citizen and not a “natural born” citizen.
It is your duty to uphold the constitution. Therefore, we the citizens of the United States ask that you initiate a congressional investigation and demand documentary proof that Senator Obama is a “natural born” citizen of the United States of America. This proof could include items such as his original birth certificate, showing the name of the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor, all of his passports with immigration stamps, and verification from the governments where the candidate has resided, verifying that he did not, and does not, hold citizenship of these countries, or any other documents that certify an individual’s citizenship and/or qualification for office.
Although there have been questions for months about Mr.Obama’s eligibility, the first lawsuit was filed on August 21, 2008. What is troubling and frustrating is that the questions could have easily been answered by Mr. Obama. However, he has refused to provide his vault birth certificate. Why would he not want to provide it?
Senator Obama could be compromised if he is not a natural born citizen, which means our country is compromised. The secret briefings he is now receiving should stop immediately. This citizenship issue could resurface during an Obama presidency. If he has ever presented himself as a US citizen or with dual citizenship, during international travel and/or on official applications for any institution such as a university, other people will know (or find out) about it. He might be vulnerable to domestic or foreign blackmail, or pressed for favors, which are not in the best interests of the average American.
We ask you again, as concerned citizens and patriots, to launch an investigation or to file a challenge against the electors who will vote on December 15th. Failure to grant this request to verify the constitutionally required qualifications of Senator Obama not only allows, but promotes, an overwhelming degree of disrespect for our Constitution and for our electoral process, would allow a potentially corrupted, fraudulent, nomination and election process to continue.
For Constitutional government,
(your signature)
(your name)
A Friend of the Court and a citizen of the United States of America
(your address)
(your phone number)
(your email address)
For further information contact:
Philip J. Berg, Esquire555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531Cell (610) 662-3005(610) 825-3134(800) 993-PHIL [7445]Fax (610) 834-7659philjberg@obamacrimes.com
Reference for your review:
PA Philip J. Berg lawsuit: all documents
http://www.obamacrimes.com/index.php/component/finder/search?q=court+documents+attached
CA Ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes; Dr. Wiley S. Drake, Sr.; Markham Robinson lawsuit http://americamustknow.com/Documents/Final%20writ%20Keyes%20v%20Bowen.pdf
Current Washington Times Ad running regarding Obama’s citizenship
http://www.obamacrimes.com/attachments/065_Obama%20Crimes%20Ad%20-%20Wash%20Times%2020081117.pdf
Obama's Birth Certificate Verified By State
http://www.kitv.com/politics/17860890/detail.html?rss=hon&psp=news
Monday, October 27, 2008
McCain-Palin - I can't wait to see them in the White House!
Isn't it going to be great in January when John McCain and Sarah Palin move into the White House? I can't wait for the changes we're going to see!
I know everyone keeps dumping on how minute the earmarks are, but to me they're a big thing. It speaks to the mindset of those we've elected, their ego, their need for power, their need to stay elected and their lack of concern for our hard-earned tax dollars.
I saw a thing today from the Wall Street Journal comparing the tax plans of Barack Obama and John McCain. It spelled out very clearly how much better McCain's plan will be for all, not just the few.
I'm in the process of re-reading Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I highly recommend it to everyone. I don't agree with everything she puts forth, but I think it is a timely read given what we're hearing from the Obama campaign.
I am hearing more and more enthusiasm for our ticket! Today while scanning through blogs and email messages I saw the news about the W.A.M. '08 group (http://www.wam08.org/ I think). This is a group of thousands and thousands and thousands of Independent, Democrat and Republican groups and individuals working together to get McCain-Palin elected.
Then I received an update from http://www.teamsarah.org/ and saw the huge increases in numbers overnight! It jumped 10,000 in just one day! Impressive don't you think?
And then I saw the post by one of my fellow bloggers about the http://www.catholicvote.org/ (or .com?) group that is over a million strong. Pro-LIFE, which should mean pro-McCain-Palin.
There are many, many people who are working hard, doing things that aren't making it into the mainstream media. We can do this friends, we can and will win on Nov. 4th! Start thinking about all the great things the future holds for us with Sarah Palin out there working to make us oil independent! She's going to be a superb advocate for our special needs children, too.
Palin and McCain are going to be able to make great strides in Washington to clean up the rabble. I think they'll probably be fighting a Democrat Congress, but in two years if we keep working we can hand them enough votes to work miracles during the last two years of this term.
I noted that Priests for Life (Catholic group) is asking members to pray every night for the right choice on Nov. 4th (or something like that). I think all Christians and those of any praying faith should be joining them in sending up prayers for wisdom for voters.
Loved the slogan I heard shouted out today at a Palin rally: Use your brain, vote McCain! Catchy.
I know everyone keeps dumping on how minute the earmarks are, but to me they're a big thing. It speaks to the mindset of those we've elected, their ego, their need for power, their need to stay elected and their lack of concern for our hard-earned tax dollars.
I saw a thing today from the Wall Street Journal comparing the tax plans of Barack Obama and John McCain. It spelled out very clearly how much better McCain's plan will be for all, not just the few.
I'm in the process of re-reading Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I highly recommend it to everyone. I don't agree with everything she puts forth, but I think it is a timely read given what we're hearing from the Obama campaign.
I am hearing more and more enthusiasm for our ticket! Today while scanning through blogs and email messages I saw the news about the W.A.M. '08 group (http://www.wam08.org/ I think). This is a group of thousands and thousands and thousands of Independent, Democrat and Republican groups and individuals working together to get McCain-Palin elected.
Then I received an update from http://www.teamsarah.org/ and saw the huge increases in numbers overnight! It jumped 10,000 in just one day! Impressive don't you think?
And then I saw the post by one of my fellow bloggers about the http://www.catholicvote.org/ (or .com?) group that is over a million strong. Pro-LIFE, which should mean pro-McCain-Palin.
There are many, many people who are working hard, doing things that aren't making it into the mainstream media. We can do this friends, we can and will win on Nov. 4th! Start thinking about all the great things the future holds for us with Sarah Palin out there working to make us oil independent! She's going to be a superb advocate for our special needs children, too.
Palin and McCain are going to be able to make great strides in Washington to clean up the rabble. I think they'll probably be fighting a Democrat Congress, but in two years if we keep working we can hand them enough votes to work miracles during the last two years of this term.
I noted that Priests for Life (Catholic group) is asking members to pray every night for the right choice on Nov. 4th (or something like that). I think all Christians and those of any praying faith should be joining them in sending up prayers for wisdom for voters.
Loved the slogan I heard shouted out today at a Palin rally: Use your brain, vote McCain! Catchy.
Monday, October 20, 2008
First they came for Joe the Plummer...
First they came for Joe the Plummer, but I remained silent... because I wanted Barack Obama to win...
We may have to revise the oft quoted and modified poem (posted below).
They came for Joe the Plummer and they're still going after him. "They" being Barack Obama, Joe Biden, the Democratic Party, the Liberals and the Media. They can't dispute what Obama said, they can't dispute the connection Joe has had and the impact of the conversation, thus they tear him down.
We all need to understand as conservatives that they will someday come for us if we don't speak out, speak loud and get our friends out to vote on or before November 4th.
They went after Sarah Palin and have been somewhat successful with the easily swayed.
Don't you think, know, that if the Democrats have the White House, the Congress and the Supreme Court that the so-called "Fairness" Doctrine will be enacted? Don't you realize that if they can bring this machine into play in this force now, when they only have semi-power, that we are in for real problems if they have total control?
They will come for us someday.
If we don't stand for something we'll fall for anything as the saying goes. There are a lot of people who are falling for Obama and for his message of government solving all problems, taking care of your ills and, as Obama said, redistributing the wealth.
We think our country is a strong democracy and we'll always be strong. I contend that we may be in the midst of an overthrow and half the country is opening their arms and embracing it simply because they want someone to take care of them.
I hope I'm being silly and fanciful. Maybe I am. But what if I'm not? Why take a chance?
Many of my friends talk about how bad it's going to be if Obama gets into office. They think that in four years the country will be so fed up with his policies that the Republicans will sweep back into office. I think Obama is smarter than that. I think he'll be in there for eight years if he wins and that by the end of those eight years we won't recognize our country, and possibly our world given their fascination with the American "One".
---
"First they came…" is a poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group.
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
We may have to revise the oft quoted and modified poem (posted below).
They came for Joe the Plummer and they're still going after him. "They" being Barack Obama, Joe Biden, the Democratic Party, the Liberals and the Media. They can't dispute what Obama said, they can't dispute the connection Joe has had and the impact of the conversation, thus they tear him down.
We all need to understand as conservatives that they will someday come for us if we don't speak out, speak loud and get our friends out to vote on or before November 4th.
They went after Sarah Palin and have been somewhat successful with the easily swayed.
Don't you think, know, that if the Democrats have the White House, the Congress and the Supreme Court that the so-called "Fairness" Doctrine will be enacted? Don't you realize that if they can bring this machine into play in this force now, when they only have semi-power, that we are in for real problems if they have total control?
They will come for us someday.
If we don't stand for something we'll fall for anything as the saying goes. There are a lot of people who are falling for Obama and for his message of government solving all problems, taking care of your ills and, as Obama said, redistributing the wealth.
We think our country is a strong democracy and we'll always be strong. I contend that we may be in the midst of an overthrow and half the country is opening their arms and embracing it simply because they want someone to take care of them.
I hope I'm being silly and fanciful. Maybe I am. But what if I'm not? Why take a chance?
Many of my friends talk about how bad it's going to be if Obama gets into office. They think that in four years the country will be so fed up with his policies that the Republicans will sweep back into office. I think Obama is smarter than that. I think he'll be in there for eight years if he wins and that by the end of those eight years we won't recognize our country, and possibly our world given their fascination with the American "One".
---
"First they came…" is a poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group.
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
