Monday, February 23, 2009
Not Yours to Give
Col. Davy Crockett
From The Life of Colonel David Crockett
Member of the U.S. Congress 1827-31 & 1832-35
Compiled from The Life of Colonel David Crockett
by Edward S. Ellis (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)
One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:
"Mr. Speaker --- I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this house, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him."
APPROPRIATE: To set apart for, or assign for a particular use, in exclusion of all other uses; as, a spot of ground is appropriated for a garden. [Webster?s 1828]
MONEY: 1) Coin; stamped metal; any piece of metal, usually gold, silver or copper, stamped by public authority, and used as the medium of commerce. 2) Bank notes or bills of credit issued by authority, and exchangeable for coin or redeemable, are also called money; as such notes in modern times represent coin, and are used as a substitute for it.If a man pays in hand for goods in bank notes which are current, he is said to pay in ready money. [Webster?s 1828]
CHARITY: Liberality to the poor, consisting in almsgiving or benefactions (Alms - Any thing given gratuitously to relive the poor, as money, food, or clothing, otherwise called charity), or gratuitous services to relieve them in distress. [Webster?s 1828]
"Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and, if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."
AUTHORITY: Legal power or a right to command or act; as the authority of a prince over subjects, and of parents over children.? Power; rule; sway. [Webster?s 1828]
He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt it would but for that speech, it received but few votes and of course, was lost.
Later when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:
"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made houseless, and besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.
The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that I should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but as I thought, rather coldly.
I began, 'Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and-'
'Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett, I have seen you once before and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering right now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.'
This was a sockdolager, I begged him to tell me what was the matter.
'Well, Colonel, it is hardly worth while to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you.
I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it, is the more dangerous the more honest he is.'
'I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional questions.'
'No, Colonel, there is no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings in Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?'
'Well, my friend, I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant amount of $20,000 to relive its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.'
'It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of, it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be intrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be and the poorer he is, the more he pays in proportion to his means.
What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000.
If you had the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all and as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity.
Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this country as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought to appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life.
The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports to be true, some of them spend not very credibly; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation and a violation of the Constitution.
So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger for the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned and you see that I cannot vote for you.'
'I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him and the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him and I said to him:
Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it and thought I had studied it fully. I have head many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law, I wish I may be shot.'
He haughtingly replied: 'Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.'
'If I don't, I said, I wish I may be shot, and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say, I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbeque and I will pay for it.'
No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbeque and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days and we can afford a day for a barbeque. This is Thursday. I will see to getting up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday and we will go together and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.'
'Well, I will be there. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name.'
'My name is Bunce.'
'Not Horatio Bunce?'
'Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend.'
It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and have been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.
At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before. Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept up until midnight talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.
I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him - no, that is not the world - I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.
But, to return to my story. The next morning I went to the barbeque and to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted - at least, they all knew me. In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened by speech by saying:
Fellow-citizens - I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to see your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.
I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:
And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error. It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so. He came upon the stand and said:
'Fellow citizens, it affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised to you today.'
He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before. I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress."
"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday."
Friday, February 20, 2009
I was wondering how long it would take before Thugocracy took over Obama’s redistribution of the wealth. The Thugs from ACORN have shown just the tip of the iceberg on how far they will go . In
Well not according to what I discovered thanks to a blogger named Lan Astaslem . Astaslem had this to say about Donna:
It looks like Donna has been gaming the system for quite a long time. Foreclosure proceedings were started way back in May 2006, after which she immediately filed for bankruptcy. After it dragged on for a year, it was dismissed pursuant to Md. Rule 2-507(c):Md. Rule 2-507(c) provides “[a]n action is subject to dismissal for lack of prosecution at the expiration of one year from the last docket entry, other than an entry made under this Rule, Rule 2-131, or Rule 2-132, except that an action for limited divorce or for permanent alimony is subject to dismissal under this section only after two years from the last such docket entry.”
It sounds like they gave up while her bankruptcy proceeded. (I don’t see anything regarding her bankruptcy, so I don’t know how that turned out.) The amount due at the time was $253,230.78.
Then, foreclosure proceedings began again last February. Obviously not enough time had passed to allow her to file for bankruptcy again - to stave off the wolves at her door - so this time the case proceeded. The amount due last year had grown to $262,151.84 — an increase of $9k - which probably amounts to the interest that was growing on the debt while she made no payments. The file was closed on 10/03/08, and the lender took possession of the property.
In addition, there is another case pending with Nationwide Insurance. She apparently didn’t pay them either. It’s a civil case, so the amount Nationwide has sued for does not show in the online records.
The property is right across the street from a large park, and ~1/2 mile from the harbor. The house right next door is currently for sale for $79.9k. These are row houses — basically all the houses on the block are the same age and have the same dimensions. So how does one end up owing over $250k on a house when the carbon copy of it is $80k???One wonders what Donna has been up to since . According to one source she has been a paid lackey on the ACORN payroll since September. Ahhh, how sweet. I am sure they can afford to pay her enough to buy another house from the billions they will undoubtedly be able to get through OBAMACORN’S latest scam.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Norman Mattoon Thomas (November 20, 1884 - December
19, 1968), and some of us may be old enough to remember him
Running for President (but I'm not), was a leading American
Socialist, pacifist, and six-time presidential candidate for
The Socialist Party of America.
Norman Thomas said this in a 1944 speech:
"The American people will never knowingly adopt
Socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will
Adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day
America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it
Happened." He went on to say: "I no longer need to run as a
Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The
Democratic Party has adopted our platform."
Friday, February 13, 2009
Does this guy just make this stuff up as he goes along or does he just read it from the Teleprompter without actually knowing what he is saying. I'll vote for the last part. I dare say he can't recall what he read 30 minutes after reading it.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Here's an idea: if Congress is going to cap salaries for executives whose companies are benefiting from the bailout and other earmarks, how about banning campaign payback to the politicians handing them our tax dollars? Naw , the left would never buy that would they.
On the Elephass’s :( Elephass is the new term for what you get when an elephant and a jackass breed. It suits these folks better than RINO) This is not the first time Collins and Snowe have broken ranks with their party. They have often found themselves at odds with the GOP leadership on taxes, budgets, the environment and social issues. They have both voted for stem-cell research, against a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, for giving illegal immigrants a path to citizenship and against a ban on partial-birth abortion. They also both voted to acquit Bill Clinton after he was impeached in 1998.
YA GOTTA BE KIDDIN: Who pays for the octuplets?
Taxpayers may wind up shouldering most of the burden of raising Nadya Suleman's kids. This is the dingbat that while on disability for a back injury saved money for the invitro deal. Cost was about $100K. In the meantime she draws welfare for the first six kids and SS disability. Now she expects the taxpayer to pay for her stupidity and the cost of the newly born 8. Hospital cost exceed 1.3 million. To raise these 8 cost is said to be over 2.3 million and she expects this to be given out of the goodness of the taxpayers heart despite her total stupidity. The woman needs some serious psychological help and certainly is not stable enough to raise one child much less 14.
Ridiculous ? Of Course but….
Don’t be surprised at what you read here. I was forewarned by most conservative bloggers long before the election but the masses failed to ‘get it”. And one wonders why I have such contempt for liberal government. The rest of the story is provided via the link on Beyond Ridiculous.
The creation of voter rolls in the land of entitlement: .People who get food stamps — 30 million and growing — will get more. People drawing unemployment checks — 4.8 million and growing — would get an extra $25, and keep those checks coming longer
But note old folks, sick , blind and such in poverty will get a whooping $250 one time pay out. Another way to purge voter rolls especially since these folks probably don’t vote the “right way.” You tax Stimulus Bill Dollars at work.
New Math according to “the ONEs” wife
Michelle Obama made the comment concerning the Bush Tax breaks which gave tax payers $600 one time payment and made fun of such when she asked “What will they do with that , buy a pair of ear rings maybe?” However the wonderful tax break for the same folks under her ‘hubby’s” plan will get a glorious $13 extra a week in their pay check which she and “the ONE” claims will really stimulate the economy. Uh Michelle, that’s a hair over $600 per year, you know the same amount that was so ridiculously low under President Bush! The lefts new math never ceases to amaze me.
Obama's idea of comforting people in this crisis
and other areas in the south, who are still coping with the death and devastation of an unusual ice storm several weeks ago, suffered more destruction yesterday as powerful winds swept through the state causing more destruction. In Kentucky , a hurricane roared through a few days ago, killing at least nine while also causing severe destruction in its wake. What is “the ONE” telling these folks? This from the WH website: Oklahoma
Wednesday, February 11th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
The estimated 6 million consumers who rely on analog TV signals now have a four month reprieve.
President Obama today signed the legislation delaying the mandatory conversion from analog to digital signals from February 17 to June 12.
"During these challenging economic times, the needs of American consumers are a top priority of my administration," the President said in an official statement.
Just the reassurance the good people of As you can see there have been some ridiculous things in the news of late. It seems that everyday it gets to be a bit more ridiculous. Maybe this is the plan of "the One" that we all laugh ourselves out of the current situation since he and his minions are not sure that this Trillion is going to be enough and there is another bill for another trillion or two in the works. Guess when Plan A fails, go to a more ridiculous Plan B.
Kentucky and need. No wonder the media people are not complaining. I suppose this could have beenposted under the Ya Gotta Be Kiddin Me but I felt it deserved it’s own place.
Change... Miranda Rights Loophole May Help Gitmo Detainees
Because terrorists are people, too. (according to Obama and his farleftnoid followers)
Omar Khadr faces five war crimes charges that include murder. (you can read about this sweet innocent murderer here)
In July 2002, Omar Khadr threw a grenade that blew up an American soldier in Afghanistan.
Khadr was wounded and captured during this same firefight. After his capture a video was found that shows Khadr toying with detonating cord as other men including Abu Laith al-Libi assemble explosives in the same house that had been destroyed in the firefight. He was also seen planting landmines while smiling and joking with the cameraman. It has been suggested that these were the same landmines later recovered by American forces on a road between Gardez and Khowst- Wiki.
Khadr was injured in the firefight and begged to be killed . . . But US medics saved his life.
Instead, of facing death, Khadr may be set free. He was not read his Miranda rights.
More hope and change . . . Team Obama admits that the Miranda rule may hamper detainee trials. The terrorists were not properly arrested on the battlefield. (What a load of barnyard bovine excrement. Only a bunch of cowardly appeasement , far left fools would come up with something as stupid as this.OOOPS ,I forgot, the Idiot in Chief supposedly taught Constitutional Law. I wonder what Constitution he studied since Miranda does not apply to terrorist nor to enemy combatants,er well, that is unless you believe in the “living constitution”. That’s the one that changes to suit what ever a bunch of idiot leftwingnoids want it to say)
The LA Times reported: (With all it's usual disdain for the US and Worship of "the One".)
Accused in a 2002 grenade blast that wounded two U.S. soldiers near an Afghan market, Mohammed Jawad was sent as a youth to Guantanamo Bay. Now, under orders by President Obama, he could one day be among detainees whose fate is finally decided by a U.S. court.
But in a potential problem, Pentagon officials note that most of the evidence against Jawad comes from his own admissions. And neither he nor any other detainee at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was ever told about their rights against self-incrimination under U.S. law.
The Miranda warning, a fixture of American jurisprudence and staple of television cop shows, may also be one of a series of constructional hurdles standing between Obama's order to close the island prison and court trials on the mainland.
A procession of similar challenges -- secret evidence, information from foreign spy services and coerced statements -- also could spell trouble for prosecutors.
All of these problems illustrate the larger difficulty that lies ahead as the nation moves from the "law of war" orientation used by the Bush administration in dealing with detainees to the civilian legal approach preferred by Obama.
Obama last month announced sweeping changes, ordered humane treatment and invited in the international Red Cross. But the changeover will not be easy or quick, underscoring the complexity of undoing the Bush administration's policies.
Each day we are seeing the real Obama being unveiled along with his true feelings toward this country and our military. And he claims he wasn't paying attention to the preaching of the Rev. Jeremiah, G-d Damn America, Wright? More barnyard bovine excrement.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Stocks plunge as government unveils bailout plan
Traders and investors complained about what they saw as a lack of specifics from Treasury Secretary
Geithner's speech "basically puts a spotlight on the fact that the government has no idea how to fix the problem," said Jeff Buetow, senior portfolio manager at Portfolio Management Consultants. "People bought on rumor and hope, and now they're selling on reality." Now that is what one can call CHANGE but not the change that Obama , Queen Pelosi and Court Jester Reid were looking for. The other court clown has been silent for the past 24 hours. Guess Joe can’t say much since this is doing nothing for the middle class, you know the group that he is suppose to lead beside still waters and into green pastures to where the goats dwell.
An increasingly tough sell
A recent poll by Pew Research Center found that a narrow majority of Americans, just 51%, support the stimulus. And that's down from 57% in January. Even worse for the administration, support seems to be dropping among people who say they've learned more about the stimulus:
And now you know why ‘the One” wanted to ram this thing down our throats as fast as possible. An informed public will not long stand for such nonsense. Too bad they were not as informed before the election or we would be having a totally different and probably lighter conversation.
So far the best quote of the week: Actually, I liked the idea of the guy who stood up at Obama's town meeting in
"Send that check to our mailbox," he said. At least we’d know where the money went.
REAL STUPID REMARKS:
One of the dumbest comments made and just when we thought VP Joe Biden was king of foot in mouth.
As the Senate voted 61-37 (thank you Senators Snowe, Collins, and Spector) to pass the porkulus bill earlier today, Senator Chuck Schumer gloated:
And let me say this: To all of the chattering class that so much focuses on those little tiny, yes, porky amendments -- the American people really don’t care.
If you wish you can watch the dripping arrogance and I will add ignorance for his stupidity will eventually catch up with him.
Just when I thought Chucky Schumer and Joe Biden held the record for saying stupid things along comes another one of the useful idiots John Kerry who had this to say about those who won’t jump through the hoops on the Porklus bill and the American people, 62% who by the way oppose this bill as it is: "You can't be trusted to invest your own money." So give it to the government to spend it for you, you dumb serf.
What a shame the days of “tar and feather “ are gone for in those days we would have seen just how the chattering serfs dealt with fools like this.
THANKS TO THE RINO’S OR ELEPHASS’S AS A FELLOW BLOGGERS WIFE HAS NOW RENAMED THEM THE STIMULUS BILL HAS PASSED.
Yes we have Specter, Snowe and Collins to thank for throwing away all the good efforts the Republican Senate has made to slow this PORKULUS BILL enough for the people to actually see what is in it. The longer it was slowed down the fewer people actually approved of the mess. Hopefully there will be something occurring to put the skids to this PORKULUS before it can all be enacted. I’m not holding my breath however since the language in the bill concerning health care would stop me from receiving treatment at the VA hospital if the cost was deemed to be not effective. I am sure that like most boondoggles this office will be manned by individuals who have the reading comprehension of a 6th grader, if that, and they only need to mark unnecessary on the form and it is denied immediately regardless of what the doctor says. Those receiving Medicare will also be included in this group so looks as if the plan is to rid the country of those with enough dang sense to actually vote, leaving only those with less than a 6th grade comprehension ability as voters.
That’s it for the past couple of days. I am sure that you have seen other Highs and Lows. Feel free to pass them on to the rest of us via this blog. E-mails won’t work since I do not have the time to read and post each one of the e-mails even though they are appreciated deeply.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
We have all been reading, hearing, and blogging about the The Stimulus Bill that Isn't
"$1,000,000,000 shall be for expenses necessary for the manufacturing of advanced batteries authorized under section 136(b)(1)(B) of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 17013(b)(1)(B)):" the bill says. The reference to the billion-dollar battery purchase is on Page 71.
Shucks, folks, even the Energizer Bunny couldn’t handle that many batteries; what are advanced batteries anyhow? I searched and haven’t found a decent explanation of what they are, but evidently, the Democrats owe someone for a lot of votes, so there goes One Billion of our tax money only to be drained away and discarded. Boy, I bet the enviro-nuts don’t know about this bill, or maybe that’s who is in on the payoff. Wonder if they have figured out how they will safely dispose of the batteries as they die. Maybe they can bury them in Harry Reid's back yard … awaiting the scream from NIMBY, Harry.
That was the light stuff that the Democrats and Obama have managed to try to slide through this week. Now, here is a real kicker that “the One” signed into order this week, and there was not one peep about it from the LSM. President Obama just invited Hamas Terrorists to the U.S. and is going to use your tax dollars to pay for their tickets. When I read this I thought it had to be a joke or one of those bad stories that get started on the internet. but then I went to the Federal Registry and looked under Presidental Orders for Feb. 04 and there is was, folks, plain as day in black and white.
By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in migration assistance to the Palestinian refugees and conflict victims in Gaza.
You can see for yourself and read it directly from the Federal Registry.
Then you can read more about the situation and what it means on this website by Paul Williams: $20.3 Million for the Resettlement of Radical Muslims (with addendum and bumped). If this shocks you, it shouldn’t. If it is a surprise, it shouldn’t be. The unqualified, empty-suited, George-Soros-sockpuppet who resides in the White House is doing only what his puppet master orders him to do. I wrote about the dangers of George Soros as far back as 2004 and made a clear connection between him and this President in blogs throughout the Primaries and during the election campaign time. It seems few were reading and fewer were paying attention. The warnings were clear, and as I stated in one blog post: "There will be a Payday, Someday." Payday is here and consequences are not going to be pleasant.
The next news flash has to do with our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms. It would appear that the “One” and his AG are in agreement that citizens shouldn’t own guns, but they can’t figure a way to actually go about taking the guns away without starting an all out revolution. So they have decided to make owning ammunition for guns more difficult and more expensive. They haven’t yet become brave enough to submit the bill to the US Congress, but California's SB-357, introduced by Democrat Joe Dunn (the name seems appropriate), has passed the Senate and is pending in an Assembly fiscal committee as the legislature pushes through its final three weeks of this year’s session. The measure may be taken up next year, the second in the two-year session.
“The legislation would require manufacturers to imprint or etch a serial number on the end of each slug or bullet starting in 2009. Boxes of cartridges bearing the same number could then be linked to buyers’ driver license recorded at the time of sale.”
So far this nonsense has picked up steam and is being presented in about a dozen states. What are these folks thinking? Are they so delusional that they actually believe that this nonsense will help track criminals? No, folks, it’s to stop you and me from buying ammunition for the guns we rightfully
Now for some good news. It seems that folks in several states are tired of having Washington cramming things down their throats that, according to the Constitution, they should not be doing. This last boondoggle bill by the President and the Democrats in Congress robbing taxpayers of over ONE TRILLION DOLLARS seems to be the straw that broke the camel's back. On Wednesday, February 4, 2009, I posted The Shot Heard 'Round New Hampshire.
Well, it seems that more states are taking up the call, and all I can say is: It’s about time! Lawmakers in 20 states have moved to reclaim sovereignty, and it looks as if more will be joining soon. States are finding it more and more difficult to balance the books, as most are required to do, without taxing the residents into oblivion. Of course, some states such as California and NY don't care and have already done so and plan more taxes for the folks who can’t manage to escape to other states. The Federal government is good at telling states what they must do without providing the funding for all the goodies that will benefit those sitting in power in Washington and continue to get them re-elected while the states go broke.
So far, eight states have introduced resolutions declaring state sovereignty under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution. They are Arizona
Analysts expect that, in addition, another 20 states, including Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nevada, Maine, and Pennsylvania, may see similar measures introduced this year.
You can find more on this situation here:
Well, that’s just some of what has been happening that has gotten my attention this past week. I look for more news, both bad and good, to be forthcoming this week. Unfortunately, and I hate to sound pessimistic, but most of it will probably be bad news, at least for those who are drinking from the well of “feel-good liberalism.”
Hope you’ve enjoyed the wrap up and will offer your comments and anything that may have caught your attention of late.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Unfortunately, the Republicans have joined in the same games as the Democrats and tried to “out-Democrat” the Democrats. That is exactly what brought about this current debacle that we are in with the housing situation, the banking situation, and the gross amount of spending on social welfare programs. The Republicans lost sight of small government, low taxes, and a strong defense. Admittedly, there was an attempt to keep taxes low and to build a strong defense, but despite the six years of majority in the Congress and a Republican President in the White House, they failed. Money normally used for defense went to social programs, and taxes were were not cut in the corporate sector where they needed to be cut. The U.S. now has the highest corporate taxes, even higher than the socialist European countries. After the Democrats took control of the Congress in ’06, it was too late to even try to return to the principles that the Party was founded upon.
In 1996, Republicans allowed the religious far right to hijack the Party without even so much as a fight. The Conservatives of the real Republican Party did not bow and cater to the religious right. That is not to say they lacked the Christian morals upon which this country was founded, but they didn’t attempt to legislate such or cram them down the throats of the rest of the country. Dick Armey stated that the GOP went from “the big ideas and vision of 1994 to the cheap political and point scoring on meaningless wedge issues of today.” Armey was right and further stated that selling out to the religious far right would come back and bite the Republicans in the butt. In ’06 his words came true. Evidently, the Republicans failed to learn from Armey’s warning, for they allowed the Democrats to keep the wedge issues in the forefront, which they knew would further divide the Republican Party, and they were able to win in ’06. They did the very same thing, without even mentioning the issues to any degree, and won in this past election. The religious far right refused to vote for Romney, claiming he was not conservative enough according to their conservative litmus test, and fought against the one candidate who had the credentials in business to refute the Dems and Obama’s arguments. Because of their religious differences, they handed the election to the left and now must bear the consequences.
The important issues of health care, Social Security, the economy, insuring a strong military and intelligence service, and energy, just to name a few of the major issues, were forgotten in favor of so-called “core” issues. Marriage, sex lives of individuals, and other such wedge issues are issues for states to decide, not the federal government. Isn’t that what the old Republican Party believed, less government interference in our lives? Just as the Democrats parleyed welfare for votes, the Republicans have parleyed wedge issues for votes. Dick Armey was totally correct on this issue, and how unfortunate that he was. Even more unfortunate is that the “Grand Old Party” no longer stands for what it once did.
The true Republican Conservatives allowed the one time for choosing to be hijacked by one small segment of the Party and chose wrong. The results will be devastating unless they take a stand once again, and realize that this is again a time for choosing. Choices must be made if there is to be a comeback. The choice cannot be the ones made in the past that Dick Armey spoke of. Conservative Republicans must make the choices that Ronald Reagan addressed.
In "A Time for Choosing," Reagan issued a clarion call: "It's time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, 'We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self government.' This idea—that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power—is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves."
He continued, "You and I are told increasingly that we have to choose between a Left or Right, but I would like to suggest that there is no such thing as a Left or Right. There is only an up or down—up to a man's age-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order—or down to the ant heap totalitarianism, and regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course."
Indeed, Conservative Republicans are now at another time for choosing if they expect any type of comeback in 2010 and 2012. What say you?
Friday, February 6, 2009
No, Harry, you have another thought coming if you think the American people are going to stand still why you and your cohorts, Pelosi, et al, cram this “pork chop” down our throats. You, Pelosi, and the President may think you can get away with stuffing this “sausage” with political paybacks to the Unions, Planned Parenthood, the eco-nuts, the ACORN(S) just to name a few, but the American people are looking at the spending—$1 trillion bailout from just a few weeks ago, the $151 billion stimulus checks from a few months before that, and the $45 billion bailout of auto makers that came in between, and especially the regular federal spending for the year of a whopping $3 trillion. Then you have the audacity to throw another TRILLON dollars worth of paybacks, payoffs, and other waste that should go through normal Congressional channels and try to fool the people into thinking it is supposed to stimulate the economy? The people are not stupid, Harry; at least 57% of them are not. Harry, that’s the number of people who are now against this god-awful splurge that you and the rest of the so-called PAYGO Democrats are for. By the way, Harry, what happened to PAYGO that “the ONE” promised the taxpayers? I suppose it was just more “mis-speak,” or perhaps “just words,” as the “anointed ONE” threw around so much during the Primaries when speaking of others’ statements and ideas.
Unfortunately, for the people selling this snake oil, that’s you Harry and your pal Pelosi, someone noticed at some point that the “new” stimulus was really just a collection of stale old pork barrel pet projects relabeled as a carefully considered plan and their opposition began to grow and grow that it is nothing but a historic waste of money, and guess what, Harry, it ain’t gonna fly!
The longer the Senate Republicans can keep this waste in the forefront, the smaller your sausage will become and the better off the American people are going to be. Harry, pay attention to the historians who have proven that the old New Deal didn’t work and the “new” New Deal is even worse. However, Harry, I am glad to see you squirming and yelling and crying so soon into the new administration. Just when you thought you and your pal, Pelosi, could pull off the biggest scam in history, it’s falling apart before your very eyes. No, Harry, no Kleenex from me, use your sleeve or better yet, Pelosi’s.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history;….(Barrack Hussein Obama )
Obama was evidenlty not paying close attention when he said this or was it as he says, "Just Words?."
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
This may be the only way to preserve our Constitution and our freedoms.
From The American Thinker by Larrey Anderson.
Four New Hampshire state legislators have introduced a resolution affirming Thomas Jefferson’s defense of state’s rights. House Concurrent Resolution 6 was recently introduced into the New Hampshire’s State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee by Rep. Itse, Rep. Ingbretson, Rep. Comerford, and Sen. Denley.
Interestingly, the authors of the New Hampshire Resolution took most of the language from the document commonly known as “Jefferson and Madison’s Kentucky Resolutions of 1798.”*
Following in the footsteps of the Founding Fathers the New Hampshire Resolution declares:
That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress….
The New Hampshire Resolution boldly defends the state’s (and it citizen’s) rights preserved under the 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Representative Daniel Itse, one of the resolutions co-authors, appeared yesterday on the Mike Church Show radio program. A transcript of the interview can be found here.
Representative Itse explained the reasoning behind the introduction of his resolution:
As a statement of the founders’ principle that it is the states who are in charge, and not the federal government; that it’s they [the states] who have the power to interpret the Constitution; and that the federal government has only definite delegated powers; and that any law enacted outside those delegated powers is null and void.
A concurrent resolution lacks legal authority. It is a non-binding expression of the intentions of the legislature. Nevertheless, these four New Hampshire state legislators have shown much courage by introducing (or reintroducing) these precious principles that have been the bedrock of our republic.
Maybe HCR 6, the shot heard round little old New Hampshire, will inspire more Americans to realize the desperate need to free ourselves from an overreaching federal government. In which case, the shot heard round New Hampshire might become the next shot heard round the world.
*Thomas Jefferson was the chief author of the Kentucky Resolutions and Madison was primarily responsible for the similar Virginia Resolutions. Both men may have worked on each set of resolutions.
Article from The American Thinker: written by Larrey Anderson
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Well, folks, here is more of the change I can do without.
It seems the “distinguished” Democrat Congressman from was invited to attend a “terrorist” rally on the steps of the state capitol in St. Paul. I am speaking of Congressman Keith Ellison, Muslim representative from Minnesota, who used the Koran to take the oath of office for Congress.
Of course, being a good Muslim, he could not turn down the invitation, regardless of how anti-American it was. He evidently only represents the Muslim population in that State and absolutely forgot that he was a UNITED STATES CONGRESSMAN, not a representative of Hamas or Fatah, and that Minnesota is not an Islamic state. I can remember a time when this idiot would have been immediately condemned by the President and those in Congress and not only censured but, in all probability, removed from office under the charge of treason.
Have these people in Washington forgotten that we are in a war, a war against terrorism? Excuse me, I forgot, “The One” has declared there is no War on Terrorism because it sounds too harsh. Well, for the folks who voted for this empty-suited, unqualified, sock puppet for George Soros, this is what you are getting. A spineless do-nothing who will allow members of HIS party to give aid and comfort to a common enemy of all freedom-loving people, not only in this country but in the whole world. Al Franken will soon be joining with Ellison in protest against his country and against friends of this country if “The One” and Harry Reid have anything to do with it.
I suppose now would be an opportune time for me to say, I TOLD YOU SO! Expect more of the same in the coming four years. Also, expect that those who speak out against such acts and events will be accused of Hate Crimes.
You can view the entire ugly incident here: Hamas Rallies at Minnesota State Capitol.