Showing posts with label constitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label constitution. Show all posts
Sunday, July 03, 2011
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Hypocricy They Name Is U.S.
RT America TV anchor detained over dancing at Jefferson Memorial.
If you don't know, RT is Russia Television.
An anchor of satellite TV channel RT America's political show Adam VS The Man, Adam Kokesh was arrested on Saturday during the silent dancing flashmob at the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, RT said in a statement on Sunday.
Kokesh, along with the other participants, was arrested after he had started silently dancing at the Thomas Jefferson Memorial protesting the U.S. District court's decision that imposes a ban on dancing within the memorial.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Messing With Texas
The TSA is another agency that needs to be abolished.
Insisting that the states have no right to restrict the pedofiles perverts groping and viewing naked body scans, the TSA threatened to impose a "No Fly Zone" on Texas.
House Bill 1937, which was passed by the House earlier this month, would make it a misdemeanor offense for a federal security agent to “intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly [touch] the anus, sexual organ, buttocks, or breast of the other person, including touching through clothing, or touching the other person in a manner that would be offensive to a reasonable person.”
The bill in the house passed unanimously but when it reached the senate it was scheduled to pass until the representative of the TSA visited the Texas chamber and a U.S. Attorney sent them a threatning letter.
We all know what happens when Obama imposes a "No Fly Zone", bombs to follow.
REMEMBER THE ALAMO!
Insisting that the states have no right to restrict the pedofiles perverts groping and viewing naked body scans, the TSA threatened to impose a "No Fly Zone" on Texas.
House Bill 1937, which was passed by the House earlier this month, would make it a misdemeanor offense for a federal security agent to “intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly [touch] the anus, sexual organ, buttocks, or breast of the other person, including touching through clothing, or touching the other person in a manner that would be offensive to a reasonable person.”
The bill in the house passed unanimously but when it reached the senate it was scheduled to pass until the representative of the TSA visited the Texas chamber and a U.S. Attorney sent them a threatning letter.
We all know what happens when Obama imposes a "No Fly Zone", bombs to follow.
REMEMBER THE ALAMO!
Friday, May 27, 2011
Thursday, March 24, 2011
I Was For It Before I Was Against It.
Senator Biden was pretty specific when he warned then president Bush that he had better not invade Iran without first getting the Congress to declare war on them. He even trotted out the Constitution as the basis for this opinion.
Apparently Vice President Biden believes the Constitution only applies to Republican presidents.
I don't hear him objecting to Obama's authorization to drop bombs and fire hundreds of missiles into Libya.
If we can't impeach Obama for this userption then what will it take?
Friday, February 25, 2011
Don't Turn Your Back.
From The Huffington Post.
On Tuesday, as U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke on issues of free speech at George Washington University, 71-year-old former CIA analyst Ray McGovern was assaulted, dragged from the room and double handcuffed with metal cuffs causing profuse bleeding.
While the "Honorable" Mrs. Clinton was blathering on about the injustice of the Iran internet crackdown on protesters 71 year old Ray McGovern remained standing and turned his back to her in protest. The result was he was assaulted and arrested and detained for no reason.
Clinton complaining about heavy-handed government oppression. Obama increasing the troop count in Afghanistan and authorizing death drones and accepting the Nobel Peace Prize. What a bunch of hypocritical ass clowns.
On Tuesday, as U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke on issues of free speech at George Washington University, 71-year-old former CIA analyst Ray McGovern was assaulted, dragged from the room and double handcuffed with metal cuffs causing profuse bleeding.
While the "Honorable" Mrs. Clinton was blathering on about the injustice of the Iran internet crackdown on protesters 71 year old Ray McGovern remained standing and turned his back to her in protest. The result was he was assaulted and arrested and detained for no reason.
Clinton complaining about heavy-handed government oppression. Obama increasing the troop count in Afghanistan and authorizing death drones and accepting the Nobel Peace Prize. What a bunch of hypocritical ass clowns.
Friday, November 19, 2010
If Jay Has His Say.
From
The Daily Caller.
Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller seems to believe that somehow congress should be the arbitrator of what is acceptable news and even entertainment programming.
In this clip he says: “I hunger for quality news. I’m tired of the right and the left,” Rockefeller bemoaned during a recent hearing on television retransmission consent. “There’s a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to Fox and to MSNBC: ‘Out. Off. End. Goodbye.’ It would be a big favor to political discourse,” he added.
He is a very good example of a politician that doesn't get it. If he actually watched Fox or MSNBC he would see that the current mood of the PEOPLE has dramatically moved toward less government not more. An unprecedented number or incumbents were turned out in the last election because Americans finally woke up to the fact that congress is dysfunctional and the only way to correct this is to vote the bums out. Unfortunately, he wasn't one of them. Maybe next time.
Mr. Rockefeller appears to be unaware that congress has no constitutional or legal authority to regulate the cable networks content. The FCC has authority only over broadcast channels.
My advice to Mr. Rockefeller is put down the remote, pick up a copy of the Constitution and study it. Thanks to the cable channels and the internet we are no longer limited to what Mr. Rockefeller and his kind decide what is "appropriate" information to consume. I'm sure he rues the day that his buddy Al Gore helped to invent the internet, the only chance we have of insuring that these dinosaurs are relegated to the dust bin of history.
The Daily Caller.
Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller seems to believe that somehow congress should be the arbitrator of what is acceptable news and even entertainment programming.
In this clip he says: “I hunger for quality news. I’m tired of the right and the left,” Rockefeller bemoaned during a recent hearing on television retransmission consent. “There’s a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to Fox and to MSNBC: ‘Out. Off. End. Goodbye.’ It would be a big favor to political discourse,” he added.
He is a very good example of a politician that doesn't get it. If he actually watched Fox or MSNBC he would see that the current mood of the PEOPLE has dramatically moved toward less government not more. An unprecedented number or incumbents were turned out in the last election because Americans finally woke up to the fact that congress is dysfunctional and the only way to correct this is to vote the bums out. Unfortunately, he wasn't one of them. Maybe next time.
Mr. Rockefeller appears to be unaware that congress has no constitutional or legal authority to regulate the cable networks content. The FCC has authority only over broadcast channels.
My advice to Mr. Rockefeller is put down the remote, pick up a copy of the Constitution and study it. Thanks to the cable channels and the internet we are no longer limited to what Mr. Rockefeller and his kind decide what is "appropriate" information to consume. I'm sure he rues the day that his buddy Al Gore helped to invent the internet, the only chance we have of insuring that these dinosaurs are relegated to the dust bin of history.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Why The Newspapers Are Failing
They claim that the inspiration behind some of the Tea Party logic comes from "resurrected once-obscure texts by dead writers". These dead writers include Frederic Bastiat and Friedrich Hayek. They didn't mention much about George Washington, Ben Franklin, James Madison, John Adams or any of the others that were so instrumental in penning our constituion that the Tea Parties draw most heavily on.
How odd it is that they don't seem to have a problem following the economic philosophy of John Maynard Keynes who died in 1946.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Happy Constitution Day
Today is the 222nd Anniversary of the adoption of the U.S. Constitution by the Constitutional Convention held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1787. Now more than ever our founding document is under attack from all sides. As we slip further and further from the principles expounded in this great document now is a great time to stop and reflect on the genius of our founding fathers.
Unfortunately it appears that the following quote from Judge Andrew Napolitano more closely represents the current situation in Washington:
By ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO
Last week, I asked South Carolina Congressman James Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives, where in the Constitution it authorizes the federal government to regulate the delivery of health care. He replied: "There's nothing in the Constitution that says that the federal government has anything to do with most of the stuff we do." Then he shot back: "How about [you] show me where in the Constitution it prohibits the federal government from doing this?"
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Not of Supreme Caliber.
You gotta wonder where Obama finds these winners?
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's pick to become the newest Supreme Court justice, is on the record with some controversial remarks about 'diversity,' 'judicial activism' and female judges vs. male judges.
For example, the New York Times reported that in 2001, at the annual Judge Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Lecture, Sotomayor had this to say:
“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”
“Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences,” she said later, regarding non-white, female judges, “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”
Also, there is a 2005 video of Sotomayor, speaking with potential law clerks, saying that a “court of appeals is where policy is made.” She added: “And I know — I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. O.K. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it ...”
So here she is laughing about using the bench to make policy. Please fight this woman's confirmation.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's pick to become the newest Supreme Court justice, is on the record with some controversial remarks about 'diversity,' 'judicial activism' and female judges vs. male judges.
For example, the New York Times reported that in 2001, at the annual Judge Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Lecture, Sotomayor had this to say:
“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”
“Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences,” she said later, regarding non-white, female judges, “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”
Also, there is a 2005 video of Sotomayor, speaking with potential law clerks, saying that a “court of appeals is where policy is made.” She added: “And I know — I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. O.K. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it ...”
So here she is laughing about using the bench to make policy. Please fight this woman's confirmation.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Come on Peter-rachet it up.
Oregon Congressman Peter DeFazio is concerned that with Bush's executive order 51 which redefines government continuity, and contravenes our constitution, is perhaps a conspiracy that needs to be investigated.
When he asked to view the documents, which are held in the secure "bubble-room", he was denied access even though he has top security clearance and is a leading member of the U.S. House on the Homeland Security Committee.
"We're talking about the continuity of the government of the United States of America," DeFazio says. "I would think that would be relevant to any member of Congress, let alone a member of the Homeland Security Committee."
"Maybe the people who think there's a conspiracy out there are right," DeFazio said.
Do you think?
Simply put, the order gives the president the power to assume control of all governments, Federal, State, Local and Tribal, in the event of a catastrophic national disaster, terrorist attack or civil unrest. All this without the debate or input from congress and now he won't even let them look at the plans.
Impeach Bush now before martial law.
When he asked to view the documents, which are held in the secure "bubble-room", he was denied access even though he has top security clearance and is a leading member of the U.S. House on the Homeland Security Committee.
"We're talking about the continuity of the government of the United States of America," DeFazio says. "I would think that would be relevant to any member of Congress, let alone a member of the Homeland Security Committee."
"Maybe the people who think there's a conspiracy out there are right," DeFazio said.
Do you think?
Simply put, the order gives the president the power to assume control of all governments, Federal, State, Local and Tribal, in the event of a catastrophic national disaster, terrorist attack or civil unrest. All this without the debate or input from congress and now he won't even let them look at the plans.
Impeach Bush now before martial law.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
With Friends Like This, Who Needs Enemies?
George Bush thumbs his nose once more at our constitution
On July 17th President Bush made another unconstitutional power grab by signing another executive order. This one is titled "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq".
This order blocks the property of any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense,
(i) to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of:
(A) threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq; or
(B) undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people;
(ii) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or services in support of, such an act or acts of violence or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or
(iii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.
(b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section include, but are not limited to, (i) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order, and (ii) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.
Sec. 2. (a) Any transaction by a United States person or within the United States that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
More laws put into effect by the executive branch without the benefit of congressional debate or vote. The guilt of this crime appears to be determined by the Sec. of Treasury rather than a court of law.
Watch out protesters, you might lose your home.
On July 17th President Bush made another unconstitutional power grab by signing another executive order. This one is titled "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq".
This order blocks the property of any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense,
(i) to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of:
(A) threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq; or
(B) undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people;
(ii) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or services in support of, such an act or acts of violence or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or
(iii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.
(b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section include, but are not limited to, (i) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order, and (ii) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.
Sec. 2. (a) Any transaction by a United States person or within the United States that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
More laws put into effect by the executive branch without the benefit of congressional debate or vote. The guilt of this crime appears to be determined by the Sec. of Treasury rather than a court of law.
Watch out protesters, you might lose your home.
Saturday, December 30, 2006
Save the 1st. Amendment
One of the biggest challenges we as believers of the 1st amendment will face in the new year will be to resist the renewed effort to expand "Hate crime" legislation. We will experience increased pressure from special interest groups to include sexual preference, religion and a number of other topics that they would like to legislate the direction of dialog that is legal. This restriction is already in place in Europe, Canada and Australia. In Australia, two pastors were tried and convicted of "vilifying Muslims" for quoting from the Quran in an attempt to point out differences between Christianity and Islam.
If you believe as I do in the right to free speech and thought you must remain vigilant and challenge this attack on one of the main pillars of our nations founding. Write you congressmen on this before it becomes a national issue.
If you believe as I do in the right to free speech and thought you must remain vigilant and challenge this attack on one of the main pillars of our nations founding. Write you congressmen on this before it becomes a national issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)