The Leader Vs. The Senate
By: Michael Malbin michael@taskmanagement.com
2/21/06
The current situation is one we have seen before, noticed by some, yet continuously showing more and more similarities. Just like ancient Rome, Greece, and other great civilizations, when too much power is given to an elected leader, things crumble, the senate must remain strong for the people. Some of the most easily viewable similarities, The Bush administration of today, and The Palpatine administration (Star Wars) of long, long ago grow more and more alike. Luckily, this is not a movie, and the public has begun to stand against our Leader.
In Star Wars, the elected leader gains more and more power in time of war, eventually causing the senate to split on nearly every decision. This in turn brought more power to the Chancellor, who in turn plans secret trade negotiations, unneeded wars, etc....
In the movie, the Chancellor eventually takes ultimate power, in America, this will not happen.
For the first time in longer then I can remember, the Red and Blue delegates agree to disagree with the president. Unfortunately, this is the first time they are standing together. Perhaps, this will finally shed the light on the followers of our President, who have been happy being in the dark for so long. So happy in fact, I would say some of the president's followers have been so used to the dark, when the light got turned on, they kept their eyes closed. I hope (not pray) that this will be the beginning of a new era in American politics, one of togetherness, and not 2 separate togethernesses.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
The Great Tea Party Conspiracy, exposed
In 2008, Ron Paul had his "Tea Party for Dollars" moneybomb, where he raised over $4.3 million in one day.
That spawned the Tea Party movement.
For a while in 2009, protests popped up all over the country calling for conservative and libertarian values and to stop the growth of bigger government, and the elite.
Then... without all of the members of the movement noticing... it was taken over....... By liberals.
Liberals managed to quietly start funding a bunch of different 'tea party' groups... all with different names, but still with the same ideas and rally points... at first.
As the liberal money was continued to be pumped in, something happened... The various tea party groups started to fight with themselves.
It slowly became a game of "WE are the true voice of the tea party, not them"
To late for the liberals in 2010, the focus was still on taxes, and not social issues, birth certificates, or infighting
Then liberals began to control the message as well.... Focus on the social issues, birth certificates, and infighting.
Since the 2010 elections, the liberals have put the plan into action, with great success.
Since then, the tea party has become the republicans biggest enemy.
The liberals purposefully led the tea party so far right, that they now conflict with their own parent-party, the GOP.
They changed the biggest talking points from taxes to birth certificates, dates on notes, and just pure anti-Obama no matter what the issue or situation.
Then the liberals got Trump in the game... "Play up the birth certificate issue for us, it will get you tons of ratings." Of course Trump obliged.
This peaked all in one week, and then the hammer dropped. OBL killed and birth certificate released in one week.
The tea party was left floundering, and the liberals were left laughing.
Just yesterday, the tea party and republicans infighting caused a little known democrat to win a very heavily red district (that district even voted for Paladino)
At this point, the tea party is no longer in the news, and is seen as a fading trend.
All thanks to tricky infiltration by liberals.
That spawned the Tea Party movement.
For a while in 2009, protests popped up all over the country calling for conservative and libertarian values and to stop the growth of bigger government, and the elite.
Then... without all of the members of the movement noticing... it was taken over....... By liberals.
Liberals managed to quietly start funding a bunch of different 'tea party' groups... all with different names, but still with the same ideas and rally points... at first.
As the liberal money was continued to be pumped in, something happened... The various tea party groups started to fight with themselves.
It slowly became a game of "WE are the true voice of the tea party, not them"
To late for the liberals in 2010, the focus was still on taxes, and not social issues, birth certificates, or infighting
Then liberals began to control the message as well.... Focus on the social issues, birth certificates, and infighting.
Since the 2010 elections, the liberals have put the plan into action, with great success.
Since then, the tea party has become the republicans biggest enemy.
The liberals purposefully led the tea party so far right, that they now conflict with their own parent-party, the GOP.
They changed the biggest talking points from taxes to birth certificates, dates on notes, and just pure anti-Obama no matter what the issue or situation.
Then the liberals got Trump in the game... "Play up the birth certificate issue for us, it will get you tons of ratings." Of course Trump obliged.
This peaked all in one week, and then the hammer dropped. OBL killed and birth certificate released in one week.
The tea party was left floundering, and the liberals were left laughing.
Just yesterday, the tea party and republicans infighting caused a little known democrat to win a very heavily red district (that district even voted for Paladino)
At this point, the tea party is no longer in the news, and is seen as a fading trend.
All thanks to tricky infiltration by liberals.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
GOP: We voted in favor of a No fly Zone, before we forgot and said we didn't
3/1/2011--Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.
Applauds the courage of the Libyan people in standing up against the dictatorship of Muammar Gadhafi and for demanding democratic reforms and respect for human and civil rights. Condemns systematic violations of human rights in Libya, including attacks on protesters demanding democratic reforms. Calls on Muammar Gadhafi to desist from further violence, recognize the Libyan people's demand for democratic change, resign his position, and permit a peaceful transition to democracy.
Welcomes the vote of the U.N. Security Council on resolution 1970 referring the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court (ICC), imposing an arms embargo on the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, freezing Gadhafi family assets, and banning international travel by Gadhafi, members of his family, and senior advisors.
Urges:
(1) the Gadhafi regime to abide by Security Council Resolution 1970, and
(2) the Security Council to take such further action to protect civilians in Libya from attack, including the possible imposition of a no-fly zone over Libyan territory.
Welcomes:
(1) the African Union's (AU) condemnation of the disproportionate use of force in Libya and urges the AU to take action to address the human rights crisis in Libya,
(2) the United Nations Human Rights Council's (UNHRC) decision to recommend Libya's suspension from the Council and urges the U.N. General Assembly to vote to suspend Libya's rights of Council,
(3) Secretary of State Clinton's attendance at the UNHRC meeting in Geneva and urges the Council's assumption of a country mandate for Libya that employs a Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Libya, and
(4) U.S. outreach to Libyan opposition figures in support of an orderly transition to a democratic government in Libya
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Why Sarah Palin can't run for president.. and can't win the primary.
I was doing some reading on Mitt Romney last night, he has been all over the place politically.
Going from a pro-gay rights, pro-abortion rights... to anti-both. But, that's not the point here.
Although Romney basically ditched Massachusetts to plan and run the Olympics... which was a success... he did one thing that Palin just can't even stand on the same stage as him and be taken seriously.
Romney remained governor, and ran the Olympics.... In other words, he didn't quit, even though it was clear his interests were elsewhere.
Therefore, Palin can't run... and if she does, she can not beat Romney.
How can Palin stand on the same stage with Romney? I don't think she can.
Forgetting everything about policy, ideology, etc.... Palin is a quitter, and Romney isn't.
Going from a pro-gay rights, pro-abortion rights... to anti-both. But, that's not the point here.
Although Romney basically ditched Massachusetts to plan and run the Olympics... which was a success... he did one thing that Palin just can't even stand on the same stage as him and be taken seriously.
Romney remained governor, and ran the Olympics.... In other words, he didn't quit, even though it was clear his interests were elsewhere.
Therefore, Palin can't run... and if she does, she can not beat Romney.
How can Palin stand on the same stage with Romney? I don't think she can.
Forgetting everything about policy, ideology, etc.... Palin is a quitter, and Romney isn't.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Egypt proved there is no need for a 2nd amendment.
I am sure this will infuriate a LOT of people. But when you look at the way things went down, it proves in today's modern world, "second amendment remedies" are not needed to take down a tyrannical government.
The 2nd amendment reads:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
In the last 18 days, we saw that a well regulated militia is NOT necessary to secure a free state. It has proved the reasoning behind the second amendment to not be needed, because we live in a different world now.
What we have seen happen is that information, not guns, is the ultimate weapon against an unfair or tyrannical government, and non democratic government's are fully aware of this. In Iran, you do not hear about a crackdown on weapons, you hear about a crackdown on the spread of information and communication.
The internet has become the most powerful tool in the world, capable of anything.
With the ability to instantly spread information to everyone in the entire world, guns and force are powerless.
If we ever faced a situation anything like what we just saw happen in Egypt, we could accomplish the same thing, without a single shot being fired.
The 2nd amendment reads:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
In the last 18 days, we saw that a well regulated militia is NOT necessary to secure a free state. It has proved the reasoning behind the second amendment to not be needed, because we live in a different world now.
What we have seen happen is that information, not guns, is the ultimate weapon against an unfair or tyrannical government, and non democratic government's are fully aware of this. In Iran, you do not hear about a crackdown on weapons, you hear about a crackdown on the spread of information and communication.
The internet has become the most powerful tool in the world, capable of anything.
With the ability to instantly spread information to everyone in the entire world, guns and force are powerless.
If we ever faced a situation anything like what we just saw happen in Egypt, we could accomplish the same thing, without a single shot being fired.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Bobby V dessert Grab
2 weeks ago my friend sent me an email. Bobby Valentine would be doing a fundraiser in Ridgefield, at my regular bar, as a bartender. Cool!
So, time goes by, and then the day comes yesterday.
I went over to the bar, and talked with the owners, who I know, and they said to get there early because it was going to be packed.
When work ended, I ran home, got my mets hat, a sharpie, my camera, and of course, my wife.
We head out to the bar, and by the time we get there (early, 6pm) the bar stools were all taken, but we got the best table in the place. Time goes by and Bobby is walking around, serving some drinks and talking to people.
I decided to wait until after we ate to try to talk and meet him. Big mistake.
By around 730 when we had finished eating, the place was packed… People kept trying to use half of our table, but then my friend showed up and covered the rest of the table.
We had a few drinks, and then I convinced our waiter to get Bobby to come over! He did his job, and received a tip for it.
Finally, we got to meet with Bobby V. I shook his hand, he signed the hat, but then a VERY odd exchange happened.
I told him that I really enjoyed his documentary about his time in Japan. He responded with “you guys look like you are MTV age, have you heard of……..” We do? I am almost 30! MTV? Anyway, I said to him “well, not really anymore, MTV isn’t the same as it used to be.” Not a big deal, and we kept talking for a bit.
Then, out of nowhere, he reached over, grabbed a piece of our dessert, dunked it in Ash’s ice cream, took a bite……. then asked if he could have some!
ARE YOU KIDDING ME!
I brushed it off as nothing, but on the inside I was dying to pull a Larry David. “Yes, you can have some, but you should have asked first, and then took some.” I wanted to say that SOOOO bad.
I still can’t believe he did that.
Anyway, it was a fantastic time, but the dessert grab will be the thing I remember the most.
So, time goes by, and then the day comes yesterday.
I went over to the bar, and talked with the owners, who I know, and they said to get there early because it was going to be packed.
When work ended, I ran home, got my mets hat, a sharpie, my camera, and of course, my wife.
We head out to the bar, and by the time we get there (early, 6pm) the bar stools were all taken, but we got the best table in the place. Time goes by and Bobby is walking around, serving some drinks and talking to people.
I decided to wait until after we ate to try to talk and meet him. Big mistake.
By around 730 when we had finished eating, the place was packed… People kept trying to use half of our table, but then my friend showed up and covered the rest of the table.
We had a few drinks, and then I convinced our waiter to get Bobby to come over! He did his job, and received a tip for it.
Finally, we got to meet with Bobby V. I shook his hand, he signed the hat, but then a VERY odd exchange happened.
I told him that I really enjoyed his documentary about his time in Japan. He responded with “you guys look like you are MTV age, have you heard of……..” We do? I am almost 30! MTV? Anyway, I said to him “well, not really anymore, MTV isn’t the same as it used to be.” Not a big deal, and we kept talking for a bit.
Then, out of nowhere, he reached over, grabbed a piece of our dessert, dunked it in Ash’s ice cream, took a bite……. then asked if he could have some!
ARE YOU KIDDING ME!
I brushed it off as nothing, but on the inside I was dying to pull a Larry David. “Yes, you can have some, but you should have asked first, and then took some.” I wanted to say that SOOOO bad.
I still can’t believe he did that.
Anyway, it was a fantastic time, but the dessert grab will be the thing I remember the most.
We need stricter gun laws. This PROVES it 100%
Here it is. Exactly what people who don't like guns have been saying, and exactly what pro-gun people deny deny deny.
This is exactly why we need stricter gun laws.
________________________________
How difficult is it for criminals, the mentally ill, and drug abusers to buy guns in Arizona?
We sent undercover investigators with hidden cameras to find out, and the answer is: not difficult at all. Just 15 days after the horrible tragedy in Tucson, our investigators found that people who may be prohibited by federal law from purchasing guns can nevertheless buy them as easily as a hamburger with fries at the local McDonald's.
The investigators visited a Phoenix gun show as a follow-up to a 2009 undercover investigation we conducted at gun shows across Ohio, Tennessee, and Nevada. In that investigation, we found out just how easy it is for criminals and the mentally ill to walk in and buy guns - no questions asked.
The investigation sought to answer two simple questions:
First, how easy is it to buy a gun without a background check?
It's easy. At the gun show, an investigator bought - with no background check - a Glock 19 with an extended magazine, similar to the gun Jared Loughner allegedly used to kill six and wound 13 others, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Unfortunately, under current federal laws, that sale was legal.
The second question we ask was would private sellers sell guns to people who said they probably couldn't pass a background check?
Again, the answer was yes. An investigator bought two handguns from two different private sellers, even after they said they probably couldn't pass a background check.
________________________________
Now, you are probably saying to yourself... this is bullshit, some stupid liberal setup job, right?
WRONG.
The investigation was conducted by NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
But article is probably some liberal making up most of it.
WRONG.
The article is written, with many more details, by NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
But who believes it? There isn't a video
WRONG.
The video is attached at the top of the article.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-bloomberg/undercover-at-an-arizona_b_81638 1.html
Tell me again we don't need stricter gun laws.....
This is exactly why we need stricter gun laws.
________________________________
How difficult is it for criminals, the mentally ill, and drug abusers to buy guns in Arizona?
We sent undercover investigators with hidden cameras to find out, and the answer is: not difficult at all. Just 15 days after the horrible tragedy in Tucson, our investigators found that people who may be prohibited by federal law from purchasing guns can nevertheless buy them as easily as a hamburger with fries at the local McDonald's.
The investigators visited a Phoenix gun show as a follow-up to a 2009 undercover investigation we conducted at gun shows across Ohio, Tennessee, and Nevada. In that investigation, we found out just how easy it is for criminals and the mentally ill to walk in and buy guns - no questions asked.
The investigation sought to answer two simple questions:
First, how easy is it to buy a gun without a background check?
It's easy. At the gun show, an investigator bought - with no background check - a Glock 19 with an extended magazine, similar to the gun Jared Loughner allegedly used to kill six and wound 13 others, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Unfortunately, under current federal laws, that sale was legal.
The second question we ask was would private sellers sell guns to people who said they probably couldn't pass a background check?
Again, the answer was yes. An investigator bought two handguns from two different private sellers, even after they said they probably couldn't pass a background check.
________________________________
Now, you are probably saying to yourself... this is bullshit, some stupid liberal setup job, right?
WRONG.
The investigation was conducted by NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
But article is probably some liberal making up most of it.
WRONG.
The article is written, with many more details, by NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
But who believes it? There isn't a video
WRONG.
The video is attached at the top of the article.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-bloomberg/undercover-at-an-arizona_b_81638 1.html
Tell me again we don't need stricter gun laws.....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)