Tuesday, September 21, 2010
New Jersey Governor Christie Takes on Teacher in Townhall Meeting
This is simply brilliant! First of all the teachers unions are a liberal bunch of whiners, much as this teacher and their "woes" are self-created, just as Governor Christie outlines.
The New Congress Will Consider Impeachment
The New Congress Will Consider Impeachment
In the local newspaper today, the following column appeared written by Floyd and Mary Brown/Cagle Cartoons. I have to say, they speak for me. Please click on link above to read the entire article. At the bottom of the article is a link to sign the petition to impeach Obama. Please take a moment and do so. As Mr. Brown says, our nation depends on it!
NEXT CONGRESS COULD HAVE IMPEACHMENT ON ITS AGENDA
Floyd and Mary Brown
The new Congress elected in November will surprise everyone. They will seriously consider impeaching Barack Obama.
Growing under the radar of the mainstream media is a movement that is gathering momentum.
More than one million citizens have signed petitions calling on the U.S. Congress to impeach Barack Hussein Obama. Some of the soon-to-be-elected members of Congress are amongst those who have signed up, and they are not about to be cowered by establishment Republicans scared silly of the issue.
Ultimately, it comes down to a commonly shared belief amongst Tea Party activists that Barack Obama is systematically trying to hurt America. Obama, the argument goes, is not an incompetent boob in over his head. Nor is he is not some well-meaning community organizer who has seen his plans go astray.
Barack Obama is a dishonest, manipulative liar who actually is pursuing an agenda that he hopes will take America off the international leadership stage. He wants America to fail so that the vision of internationalist socialists can be realized. America is hated by the elite intellectuals of the world because we have been the single biggest roadblock to their plans to establish a one world governing system with them in charge.
Americans has consistently rejected socialism. Whether it is Hillarycare or Obamacare, Americans are speaking with a loud, clear voice against socialism.
The Left hates America because of our belief in God, our belief in rugged individualism, our belief in private property, and our belief in the right to keep and bear arms.
It is only through impeachment that the new Congress can send Barack Obama a clear and unambiguous message that he does not have carte blanche to run roughshod over America.
Impeachment is the political tool given by the Founders to correct abuse by a president. Impeachment is often misunderstood because of confusion about what exactly constitutes an impeachable offense.
Former President Gerald Ford, while serving in the House of Representatives, said an impeachable offense was “whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.”
Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution reads: “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
The key phrase here is “high crimes and misdemeanors,” a concept in English common law that was well-known to our Founding Fathers but is grossly misunderstood in this day and age.
“High crimes and misdemeanors” essentially means bad behavior.
Here’s a passage from C-Span.org which succinctly and beautifully summarizes the historical significance surrounding the inclusion of the term “high crimes and misdemeanors” in the Constitution:
“High crimes and misdemeanors” entered the text of the Constitution due to George Mason and James Madison. Mason had argued that the reasons given for impeachment – treason and bribery – were not enough. He worried that other “great and dangerous offenses” might not be covered… so Mason then proposed “high crimes and misdemeanors,” a phrase well-known in English common law. In 18th century language, a “misdemeanor” meant “mis-demeanor,” or bad behavior.
In other words, “high crimes and misdemeanors” does not refer to a criminal act, as some would lead you to believe. Our Founding Fathers fully intended to allow for the removal of the president for actions which are gross incompetence, gross negligence, outright distasteful, or in the case of Barack Hussein Obama, actions which clearly show “malevolence toward this country, which is unabated.”
And for those who mistakenly hold the illusion that impeaching Barack Obama would be a simple matter of “playing politics,” the Founders fully intended that the impeachment of a sitting president be a political act.
The Founding Fathers deliberately put impeachment into the hands of the legislative branch rather than the judicial branch, thus transforming it from strictly a matter of legal definition to a matter of political judgment.
The Obama administration qualifies as the poster-child for bad behavior.
Obama and those around him are ravaging this great country and adding a sorry chapter to a noble history.
Impeachment, as written in the Constitution, was tailor-made for Barack Hussein Obama and our Founders placed it in our Constitution for such a time as this.
In the local newspaper today, the following column appeared written by Floyd and Mary Brown/Cagle Cartoons. I have to say, they speak for me. Please click on link above to read the entire article. At the bottom of the article is a link to sign the petition to impeach Obama. Please take a moment and do so. As Mr. Brown says, our nation depends on it!
NEXT CONGRESS COULD HAVE IMPEACHMENT ON ITS AGENDA
Floyd and Mary Brown
The new Congress elected in November will surprise everyone. They will seriously consider impeaching Barack Obama.
Growing under the radar of the mainstream media is a movement that is gathering momentum.
More than one million citizens have signed petitions calling on the U.S. Congress to impeach Barack Hussein Obama. Some of the soon-to-be-elected members of Congress are amongst those who have signed up, and they are not about to be cowered by establishment Republicans scared silly of the issue.
Ultimately, it comes down to a commonly shared belief amongst Tea Party activists that Barack Obama is systematically trying to hurt America. Obama, the argument goes, is not an incompetent boob in over his head. Nor is he is not some well-meaning community organizer who has seen his plans go astray.
Barack Obama is a dishonest, manipulative liar who actually is pursuing an agenda that he hopes will take America off the international leadership stage. He wants America to fail so that the vision of internationalist socialists can be realized. America is hated by the elite intellectuals of the world because we have been the single biggest roadblock to their plans to establish a one world governing system with them in charge.
Americans has consistently rejected socialism. Whether it is Hillarycare or Obamacare, Americans are speaking with a loud, clear voice against socialism.
The Left hates America because of our belief in God, our belief in rugged individualism, our belief in private property, and our belief in the right to keep and bear arms.
It is only through impeachment that the new Congress can send Barack Obama a clear and unambiguous message that he does not have carte blanche to run roughshod over America.
Impeachment is the political tool given by the Founders to correct abuse by a president. Impeachment is often misunderstood because of confusion about what exactly constitutes an impeachable offense.
Former President Gerald Ford, while serving in the House of Representatives, said an impeachable offense was “whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.”
Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution reads: “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
The key phrase here is “high crimes and misdemeanors,” a concept in English common law that was well-known to our Founding Fathers but is grossly misunderstood in this day and age.
“High crimes and misdemeanors” essentially means bad behavior.
Here’s a passage from C-Span.org which succinctly and beautifully summarizes the historical significance surrounding the inclusion of the term “high crimes and misdemeanors” in the Constitution:
“High crimes and misdemeanors” entered the text of the Constitution due to George Mason and James Madison. Mason had argued that the reasons given for impeachment – treason and bribery – were not enough. He worried that other “great and dangerous offenses” might not be covered… so Mason then proposed “high crimes and misdemeanors,” a phrase well-known in English common law. In 18th century language, a “misdemeanor” meant “mis-demeanor,” or bad behavior.
In other words, “high crimes and misdemeanors” does not refer to a criminal act, as some would lead you to believe. Our Founding Fathers fully intended to allow for the removal of the president for actions which are gross incompetence, gross negligence, outright distasteful, or in the case of Barack Hussein Obama, actions which clearly show “malevolence toward this country, which is unabated.”
And for those who mistakenly hold the illusion that impeaching Barack Obama would be a simple matter of “playing politics,” the Founders fully intended that the impeachment of a sitting president be a political act.
The Founding Fathers deliberately put impeachment into the hands of the legislative branch rather than the judicial branch, thus transforming it from strictly a matter of legal definition to a matter of political judgment.
The Obama administration qualifies as the poster-child for bad behavior.
Obama and those around him are ravaging this great country and adding a sorry chapter to a noble history.
Impeachment, as written in the Constitution, was tailor-made for Barack Hussein Obama and our Founders placed it in our Constitution for such a time as this.
Pro-Life Women on the Rise by Kathryn Lopez, National Review On line
Pro-Life Women on the Rise
By Kathryn Lopez | September 18th, 2010
Christine O’Donnell was ecstatic on election night. The winner of the Republican primary in Delaware was happy and beaming and passionate — she’s a natural in front of television cameras — as she celebrated her unconventional win. Watching that image, Chris Matthews on “Hardball” announced, “I think she beats out Carly Fiorina in the likeability department.”
I suppose it depends what your meaning of likable is. I like candidates who know who they are and appear completely comfortable in their own political skin. That pretty well describes Fiorina, the Republican nominee for Senate in California.
But Matthews was onto something undeniable. While Fiorina was one of the original “Mamma grizzlies” endorsed by Sarah Palin and the pro-life organization Susan B. Anthony List, the image doesn’t quite seem to fit for the former CEO. She’s not a perky takedown artist from Delaware. She’s not an exotic (to us lower 48ers) lipsticked pit bull from Alaska. She isn’t easily labeled.
Hers is a “a solid, conservative economic message that find common ground with the independent women voters on economic issues for the general election,” as Mercedes Schlapp, mother of four girls, media consultant and veteran of the George W. Bush administration, sees it. And Fiorina also happens to be a pro-life, pro-marriage conservative, running against, three-term incumbent Barbara Boxer, a foremost advocate of legal abortion. But Fiorina doesn’t make those the most prominent aspects of her campaign. She simply seeks to bring her life experience to the political table in service of the people of California.
“Carly is not running away from her views, but chooses to stay focused on the issues that matter most to voters,” Marty Wilson, her campaign manager, explains. “Because of Carly’s background as a business leader, she is afforded the best of both worlds. Values voters are comforted by her views, and economic conservatives can be assured that she won’t support new taxes and believes the unbridled growth must be halted.”
That dynamic played out in the candidates’ first debate. Sen. Boxer hyperbolically thundered: “If my opponent’s views prevailed (on abortion), women and doctors would be criminals, they would go to jail. Women would die, like they did before Roe v. Wade.” But Fiorina calmly and beautifully explained that her own family life brought her to her position. She added that she recognizes “that not everyone agrees with me on this.” And reminded voters “I recognize as well that the most important issue right now in this election is the creation of jobs and getting our government under control.” She went on, again in response to a question, to defend and explain why she opposes federal funding of embryonic-stem-cell research. Fiorina gave a plug for more promising adults-stem-cell research and didn’t miss the opportunity note that: “Senator Boxer voted against a ban on human cloning.” It’s hard to cast anyone else as extreme, as Boxer has, with that record.
Fiorina used the debate as a teachable moment, not just a battle of sound bites. And it wasn’t just pro-life me who was impressed. A Los Angeles Times review gave her high marks for her grace under fire.
And while Boxer, funded by Planned Parenthood and EMILY’s List (a group that supports female pro-choice politicians and candidates) obviously thinks she can demonize Fiorina on these issues, it’s not clear her strategy will have traction, even in California this year.
“In most polls, the race is a statistical tie,” John J. Pitney Jr., a professor of politics at Claremont McKenna College, observes, calling it “remarkable.” “Though Republicans have sometimes done well in races for state government offices, California has long favored Democrats for federal office. No Republican candidate for president or U.S. Senate has won here since 1988.”
It’s remarkable because Fiorina is being outspent. It’s remarkable because Fiorina is not running left or away from her staunchly held social positions. “Fiorina is doing well because California’s economic woes are causing many voters to question the policies that Barbara Boxer supports,” Pitney surmises.
Fiorina’s strategy resembles Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell’s race in Virginia last year. His opposition tried to paint him as a right-wing Neanderthal. But as far as he was concerned, the race was about jobs, education, and transportation — it’s what Virginia needed in a gubernatorial candidate. McDonnell not only won in the purple commonwealth, he won 51 percent of full-time, outside of the home, working women — even as his opposition insisted on emphasizing and demonizing a graduate paper he wrote on traditional gender roles.
Rest of the article can be read here
By Kathryn Lopez | September 18th, 2010
Christine O’Donnell was ecstatic on election night. The winner of the Republican primary in Delaware was happy and beaming and passionate — she’s a natural in front of television cameras — as she celebrated her unconventional win. Watching that image, Chris Matthews on “Hardball” announced, “I think she beats out Carly Fiorina in the likeability department.”
I suppose it depends what your meaning of likable is. I like candidates who know who they are and appear completely comfortable in their own political skin. That pretty well describes Fiorina, the Republican nominee for Senate in California.
But Matthews was onto something undeniable. While Fiorina was one of the original “Mamma grizzlies” endorsed by Sarah Palin and the pro-life organization Susan B. Anthony List, the image doesn’t quite seem to fit for the former CEO. She’s not a perky takedown artist from Delaware. She’s not an exotic (to us lower 48ers) lipsticked pit bull from Alaska. She isn’t easily labeled.
Hers is a “a solid, conservative economic message that find common ground with the independent women voters on economic issues for the general election,” as Mercedes Schlapp, mother of four girls, media consultant and veteran of the George W. Bush administration, sees it. And Fiorina also happens to be a pro-life, pro-marriage conservative, running against, three-term incumbent Barbara Boxer, a foremost advocate of legal abortion. But Fiorina doesn’t make those the most prominent aspects of her campaign. She simply seeks to bring her life experience to the political table in service of the people of California.
“Carly is not running away from her views, but chooses to stay focused on the issues that matter most to voters,” Marty Wilson, her campaign manager, explains. “Because of Carly’s background as a business leader, she is afforded the best of both worlds. Values voters are comforted by her views, and economic conservatives can be assured that she won’t support new taxes and believes the unbridled growth must be halted.”
That dynamic played out in the candidates’ first debate. Sen. Boxer hyperbolically thundered: “If my opponent’s views prevailed (on abortion), women and doctors would be criminals, they would go to jail. Women would die, like they did before Roe v. Wade.” But Fiorina calmly and beautifully explained that her own family life brought her to her position. She added that she recognizes “that not everyone agrees with me on this.” And reminded voters “I recognize as well that the most important issue right now in this election is the creation of jobs and getting our government under control.” She went on, again in response to a question, to defend and explain why she opposes federal funding of embryonic-stem-cell research. Fiorina gave a plug for more promising adults-stem-cell research and didn’t miss the opportunity note that: “Senator Boxer voted against a ban on human cloning.” It’s hard to cast anyone else as extreme, as Boxer has, with that record.
Fiorina used the debate as a teachable moment, not just a battle of sound bites. And it wasn’t just pro-life me who was impressed. A Los Angeles Times review gave her high marks for her grace under fire.
And while Boxer, funded by Planned Parenthood and EMILY’s List (a group that supports female pro-choice politicians and candidates) obviously thinks she can demonize Fiorina on these issues, it’s not clear her strategy will have traction, even in California this year.
“In most polls, the race is a statistical tie,” John J. Pitney Jr., a professor of politics at Claremont McKenna College, observes, calling it “remarkable.” “Though Republicans have sometimes done well in races for state government offices, California has long favored Democrats for federal office. No Republican candidate for president or U.S. Senate has won here since 1988.”
It’s remarkable because Fiorina is being outspent. It’s remarkable because Fiorina is not running left or away from her staunchly held social positions. “Fiorina is doing well because California’s economic woes are causing many voters to question the policies that Barbara Boxer supports,” Pitney surmises.
Fiorina’s strategy resembles Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell’s race in Virginia last year. His opposition tried to paint him as a right-wing Neanderthal. But as far as he was concerned, the race was about jobs, education, and transportation — it’s what Virginia needed in a gubernatorial candidate. McDonnell not only won in the purple commonwealth, he won 51 percent of full-time, outside of the home, working women — even as his opposition insisted on emphasizing and demonizing a graduate paper he wrote on traditional gender roles.
Rest of the article can be read here
Monday, September 20, 2010
Friday, September 10, 2010
9/11 and the Pentagon
Often when speaking or hearing about 9/11, only the Twin Towers are mentioned. However, some ways away, innocent Americans were killed as they went about their daily duties at the Pentagon. One of them was Melissa Rose Barnes, the daughter of a dear friend, who I had known since she was a young girl. Melissa was a blessing in her mother's life and in the lives of those who knew her. Devoted to her family, dedicated to her service in the U.S. Navy, she was a sweet and dear girl. I have pictures of her through the years. She would call me once in a while and share the events of her life. Several times, she sent pictures of her home, her pets, her in her uniform performing her duties. In the video here, you can see her picture at 54 seconds. Melissa Rose Barnes, rest in peace. We have not forgotten you.
Friday, September 3, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)