Supreme Court pick

Obama is on the news right now, with his teleprompter allowing him to give a smooth speech without ah, and uh every few words (unlike the speeches I've seen him give without the teleprompter), and the talking heads on the news were discussing his pick for the spot, and brought up one of Sotomayor's speeches at UC Berkely in 2001. This lady believes a Latina lady has more to bring to the table than a white guy. To my mind, this is racist. This is putting the color of your skin above your ability. African-american, Latina, whatever. If you're an American, just say THAT. You're not a hyphenated anything. Sure, we can see your skin might be light or dark. Big fat hairy deal. Get over it. Suck it up, and get on with life. Plow ahead, and make the most of your life, and get ahead. Get the best education you can, study hard, and make it. Don't slack off and blame others for what you failed to do. That's the suckers way out. HERE is the link to an article talking about the Supreme Court pick of Obama's, Sotomayor.

Rand Paul on sound economics

Rand Paul is the son of Ron Paul (R-TX) who used to be a Libertarian, but changed to a Republican, who also is one of the very few (if anyone else is), voting constitutionally on bills and amendments - does this bill pass the constitution test? Rand Paul is running for Kentucky Senate. Let's hope he wins, and we get another naysayer to high spending in Washington. Here's a video of him speaking at a rally in Frankfort, KY.

Princess Pelosi

Ok, so she's on Version 5.0 of what she knew (or didn't know). She's flipflopped more than a fish out of water on the dock. HOWEVER, while I was reading a blog, I ran across this link to these cartoons - Pelosi and the CIA cartoons. I didn't look at the rest of the blog, but the cartoons are hilarious! I especially liked the kool-aid one :P

Are we marching towards fascism?

I think its inching along - look at the government takeover of the auto companies - and then Wall St. and its bankers/investment companies. Now Geithner and the administration is saying that they want to be able to take over companies that have never taken TARP funds, or bailout money from the government, on the way they pay their employees and executives.

From the WSJ article, 'During a recent congressional hearing, Chairman Ben Bernanke said the Fed was working on rules that will "ask or tell banks to structure their compensation, not just at the very top level but down much further, in a way that is consistent with safety and soundness -- which means that payments, bonuses and so on should be tied to performance and should not induce excessive risk."'

So much for this being the land of the free, being able to create a business, and run it, without micromanagement from the government - which has to date, not run anything well. Or even remotely well. Look at Social Security and Medicare - they are running out of money - the administration is talking about 'taxing the rich' for more money - How long before people get so fed up with this stuff that they stop looking for good positions, and starting a business, because they're going to get taxed to death? How will that help the economy? It won't, because there will be no new start-up businesses, for people to work at. Maybe more people will switch to a barter system, which the government cannot tax. Or maybe they will try to tax it. New York state is taxing everything imaginable, in order to make up for their shortcomings in the money coming in. New York City, around 40,000 people pay over half the taxes. What if 10,000 people got tired of paying all those taxes, and left? What would be left for their tax base?

Raising taxes, and taking over businesses is NOT the answer. The outrageous spending by Congress and the Senate and the administrations are the problems to the solution. When you're in debt, you don't spend more, you spend less, however our elected representatives seem to think they are on a great gravy train that will never end, let's just spend, spend, spend. And spending us into a hole, and (hopefully not) inflation and hyperinflation. China wants the IMF to sell its gold to them.. what are they going to use for that gold? You guessed it, the money we've sold them - what are we going to do with a trillion dollars back in circulation? Prices will shoot up, the dollar will be worth even less than it is now. And remember, the borrower is slave to the lender. I find it suspicious that Barney Frank is for the IMF selling its gold to China. Actually I find pretty much everything he does, is NOT for the good of the country, but for what political gain and whatever other recognition he can achieve.

Does this make sense to you??

"Americans are looking for more government in their life, not less," Powell said last week. That's Colin Powell, a member of the GOP.. still? I thought he had left because he voted for Obama.. but that couldn't be, because he was just voting skin color like quite a few other people. McCain wouldn't have been much better than Obama, however, as he was for larger government, and socialism lite. The GOP has swung so far to the left, they've become just a different name than the Democrats. There's quite a few people that the D/R's have left behind, that are center, and to the right of center, not to mention the constitutionalists, who are starting to grow in numbers. 10th Amendment anyone? Politics has always been slimy though, and it seems the scum-suckers rise to the top of the heap in Congress/Senate.. and those men and women that go there to actually make a difference, listen to the people, and put things right.. just aren't heard, or they are belittled and mocked. I'm not looking for much on the Supreme Court, as they are all to the left of me, and Clarence Thomas, although they tried to malign him, and still do - he is the best one of the bunch. The Constitution *is* a living document, but we have strayed far from it.

As for the spending in Congress/Senate/White House - I'd like to know.. when you are running negative numbers, why *increase* spending? There are many Federal programs that can be cut out, reduced, or whole departments done away with (i.e. Dept. of Education), and if we could bring in a flat tax, then the IRS can pretty much go away. Nowadays the only sector of the economy that is growing lots of jobs is the government - this should not be. Its time for some good.. nay great.. men and women, who are willing to put shoulder to the load, and take on the established powers that be - and get this country to how it should be. Become aware of the bills that are put forth, and the amendments. Watch Cspan and Cspan2. Dull at times, I admit, but you find out what is going on. See if your local congressman/senator twitters or has a Facebook page. I know of one Texas Senator that does, and he keeps his followers updated daily on what he is doing in the TX Senate. By the way, he was a talk radio host, who got tired of the government and the idiocy that went on in Austin, and ran - and garnered 70% of the vote.

Is it really FAIR? Yes or No? sound off

Is it really fair to tax only 10% of the population for 72.4% of all the taxes collected in the United States? The people making over 92,400$ pay 10% of all the taxes collected in income taxes. 60% of the country paid 3.3% of the taxes in 2001. By 2005, very few were paying the income taxes, less than 1% of the tax. Is this fair?

Let's look at this another way - distribution of income - in 2001, bottom 40%, earning less than 30,500$ made 13.5% of the income, but paid no tax. They received money totaling 16.3 billion. By 2005, it was $33.3 billion.

And people STILL go on about "the rich" not paying their fair share. Who is considered rich for these purposes? the people making under $100,000. That isn't a whole lot. People like to throw around labels like "rich" "the poor" etc.. but we need to actually TAKE A LOOK at who is paying what.. and is this actually FAIR. Is it fair for a person who makes more to pay a higher percentage than someone who makes less? NO. Why, you might ask? Let's take a different tack on that - should they pay a higher cost for their food, their gasoline, everything they consume because they make more? Should their laundry soap cost more because they make more? Should their dog shots at the veterinarian cost more because they make more, and can afford to pay more? Am I being silly? No. I'm merely taking the sick reasoning that you are saying that "they are not paying their fair share" and applying it to everyday life.

A flat tax is fair for everyone, and a sensible solution. A 17% flat tax, would bring in more revenue for the government, and it would really make the tax code much easier. A flat tax would level the playing field for everyone. 17% of 30,000 is much less than 17% of 100,000. See what common sense can do for one?

Why he got voted in...

Maybe this explains why Obama got voted in.. at least in a good part!

Thomas Paine on the stimulus package

Here's what Thomas Paine would say if he was alive today, on this porkulus.. um.. I mean STIMULUS package!



Enjoy!

A video for you to enjoy

I don't have much more to say beyond "enjoy"..and I completely agree with this:



I'm wondering how much postage and envelopes would cost to mail a teabag to each member of congress/senate? I'm thinking it would be worth the cost. EDITED TO ADD - ONLY SEND THE LABEL WITH THE STRING!!! They are throwing away the teabag, because they do not know *what* is contained in the bag!! so get those bags out, and snip those teabags loose, and send them the labels with the strings attached! With a personal note of "I'm fed up with your overspending ways, and your lies!" Even though I may not live in their district/state, they still should know how the country is feeling about them, living in that glass city of theirs. Perhaps you, too, should get a slew of envelopes, and tea labels & strings (think CHEAP teabags!) and mail them off to each member, and put a personal note in there showing them that you are fed up, and mail it off. Maybe they will get a clue.

While we weren't looking

The government is here to help you - yesterday, they are going to pump about a trillion dollars into our system - they are borrowing money from ourselves, to PAY ourselves, to pay for things that they say we need to fund. Nice sleight of hand, isn't it? Time to crank up those printing presses! Let's roll out more money! We printed a trillion dollars yesterday, to pay for this fiasco. A billion dollars is about the size of your car, stacked up. I am going to the Houston Tea Party Wednesday, April 15th 2009, with my sign.. I just have not figured out yet what to put on it. Any ideas? Please leave a comment if you have a great idea. OR better yet - find a tea party by you, and go to it! bring your own sign! Call your senator and congressman, and complain about the money they are spending and creating out of nothing. Remember Germany before world war 2 - a wheelbarrow full of money for a loaf of bread, bought at lunchtime, because by the time one was off at the end of the day, the price would have gone up. People were paid daily, if not twice a day, because the money was going up at such a high pace. The Carter years were mild, compared to what will be coming with this money printing fling going on now, and spending money that they do not have.

Its official -

Congress is full of idiots. They allow the bonuses to be given, Dodd even puts in the date that they are OK prior to (Feb 11,2009) and they knew about this before they gave the bonuses, and they are "up in arms" about these AIG executives getting bonuses? Don't these people read the legislation that they sign? And NOW they've voted to TAX the money back, 328 to 93 against, 85 republicans voting for. This sets a really bad precedent. Seems to me, they are using it as a punitive punishment for something that *congress* has done, instead of the people receiving the retention bonuses. Who's to say that congress isn't going to do this to other companies and peoples now that the precedent has been set? Law in this country no longer goes by the Constitution, it goes by precedent.

Barney Frank.. goes crazy

So this is kind of old (from January 11th 2009) but I just heard about this today and got a laugh out of his behavior. WHY do they keep electing this moron?

On January 11, 2007, Representative Barney Frank was sitting in for the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.

Republicans were trying to seize on the disclosure that American Samoa was exempted from a minimum wage bill that passed the House a day earlier -- which some suspected would benefit Starkist, a company located in the San Francisco district of Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The House had moved on to stem-cell research by yesterday, but Representative Patrick McHenry , a North Carolina Republican, rose to ask about the minimum wage bill.

"FRANK: Yes, the gentleman may state the inquiry.

McHENRY: So the chair is saying that I may not offer an amendment exempting American Samoa --

FRANK: The gentleman will suspend! The gentleman is making a speech and will suspend. The chair is not saying anything --

McHENRY: If the chair will let me finish my question.

FRANK: (pounding gavel) The gentleman will suspend. The chair has answered the gentleman's question. The gentlemen will state the point of order.

McHENRY: How many times --

FRANK: No. No. The gentleman -- (pounding gavel) the gentleman -- ''how many times'' could not conceivably be a point of order.

McHENRY: If the chair will not answer my question --

FRANK: The gentleman will not interrupt. (pounding gavel)

McHENRY: Is exempted from this legislation.

FRANK: (pounding gavel) The gentleman will not -- well, the chair is presiding, will not make speeches in the guise of a parliament inquiry. (pounding gavel) The gentlemen will suspend. The gentlemen --

McHENRY: Point of order.

FRANK: The gentlemen from Texas will suspend. (pounding gavel)"

Something from TV

As I was watching TV last week, Glenn Beck (whether you agree politically with him or not) is doing a series on "we surround them" on principles of life - and he came up with 12 core principles that pretty much everyone can agree on - except for those who are weaselly takers - those who are pretty much slugs.

12 Values

* Honesty
* Reverence
* Hope
* Thrift
* Humility
* Charity
* Sincerity
* Moderation
* Hard Work
* Courage
* Personal Responsibility
* Friendship

I'd say there's a good portion of people who dont ascribe to these anymore - and those are the 'takers' of society.. those who feel that they deserve to get what is theirs, they deserve to have society support them merely because they're unwilling to get a job, it's *beneath* them to work at McDonalds, or Jack in the Box, or to do menial work. They'd rather sit around in their houses, getting paid for doing nothing, watching cable on their new flatscreen TVs. And yes, the poor in this country are NOT poor. When working people are struggling to make ends meet, and buying store brands, and lower priced goods at the grocery store, you see people with Lone Star cards buying high priced goods and junk at the grocery store. They don't have to worry about their next paycheck.

This is utter and complete idiocy

This bill introduced into congress by Mr Rush, H.R. 45 - "Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009" which the awful text can be found HERE. If this isn't a gun-hater's beginning of the dream bill, I don't know what is. As I read the bill, I was reminded of much of the Bill of Rights..and how it's trampled by this bill introduced. What this bill fails to take into account, is that the gun crime that he wants to curb, is done by *criminals*, who really don't give a flip about any new laws. These laws only serve and suffice to make the law-abiding populace miserable, and generally unarmed. Other countries have registered weapons before, and then confiscated them - because they knew where they were, and who had them. This Mr. Rush might have had good intentions, but he's going about it all wrong. He would be better served, by making up more task forces to go after gangs, and scrambling for federal dollars for police forces to man up to go after gangs.

I find this paragraph interesting:

(2) it is in the national interest and within the role of the Federal Government to ensure that the regulation of firearms is uniform among the States, that law enforcement can quickly and effectively trace firearms used in crime, and that firearms owners know how to use and safely store their firearms.

Again, its NOT the role of federal government! Where in the constitution is this found? Again the 10th Amendment is being trampled.

X. 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.

On a lighter note

Here is a little USSA video for you to view

hah!

I'm an embarrassment to Barack!


I only scored 19 on the Obama Test