Now I Understand How Congress Works

Technorati Tags: political, Political Interest Groups, Politics Definition

Anti Republican Humor

Technorati Tags: Anti Republican, Republican, voting

Anti-Democrat Humor

Technorati Tags: AntiDemocrat, Humor

NO CHANGE

Obama Health Bill NO CHANGE except it allows Government Real-time Access to Bank Accounts www.infowars.com Kurt Nimmo Infowars www.infowars.com August 3, 2009Not only will Obama ration your health care — especially if you are a senior citizen — and have the government decide what treatment and benefits you get, the proposed plan will also build and expand the governments surveillance and control grid. Section 163 of the bill now in Congress allows the government real-time access to a persons bank records, including direct access to bank accounts for electronic fund transfers. Section 163 of the bill now in Congress allows the government real-time access to a persons bank records, including direct access to bank accounts for electronic fund transfers. Even-though the bill mentions privacy aspects, the fact remains that if approved, Obamas health care plan will allow government access at any time to your personal bank records.

Technorati Tags: Alex, Care, Change, Health, Jones, Socialized, TvObama's

Democrat, Republican, Independent, Libertarian Understand This.

An open letter from a woman in Arizona to our nation’s leadership: I have read this letter many times, and nothing I could add would or could say any more.

Please read this letter carefully and feel the depth of passion the lady feels and so eloquently expresses.

I’m a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you’re willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now. You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would horribly feel so disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut job am I? Will you please tell me?

Well, these are briefly my views and issues for which I seek representation:

One, illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders. Close the underground tunnels. Stop the violence and the trafficking in drugs and people. No amnesty, not again. Been there, done that, no resolution. P.S., I’m not a racist. This isn’t to be confused with legal immigration.

Two, the TARP bill, I want it repealed and I want no further funding supplied to it. We told you no, but you did it anyway. I want the remaining unfunded 95% repealed. Freeze, repeal.

Three: Czars, I want the circumvention of our checks and balances stopped immediately. Fire the czars. No more czars. Government officials answer to the process, not to the president. Stop trampling on our Constitution and honor it.

Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over. There is more to say.

Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive decision. Don’t you dare try to pass this in the middle of the night and then go on break. Slow down!

Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully restored. I want less government in my life, not more. Shrink it down. Mind your own business. You have enough to take care of with your real obligations. Why don’t you start there.

Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010 census. I want them investigated. I also do not want mandatory escrow fees contributed to them every time on every real estate deal that closes. Stop the funding to ACORN and its affiliates pending impartial audits and investigations. I do not trust them with taking the census over with our taxpayer money. I don’t trust them with our taxpayer money. Face up to the allegations against them and get it resolved before taxpayers get any more involved with them. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, hello. Stop protecting your political buddies. You work for us, the people. Investigate.

Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no. I work for my money. It is mine. I have always worked for people with more money than I have because they gave me jobs. That is the only redistribution of wealth that I will support. I never got a job from a poor person. Why do you want me to hate my employers? Why — what do you have against shareholders making a profit?

Nine, charitable contributions. Although I never got a job from a poor person, I have helped many in need. Charity belongs in our local communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and our local resources. Butt out, please. We want to do it ourselves.

Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Sink or swim like the rest of us. If there are hard times ahead, we’ll be better off just getting into it and letting the strong survive. Quick and painful. Have you ever ripped off a Band-Aid? We will pull together. Great things happen in America under great hardship. Give us the chance to innovate. We cannot disappoint you more than you have disappointed us.

Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about it? Let’s have it. Let’s say we give the buzzwords a rest and have some straight honest talk. Please try — please stop manipulating and trying to appease me with clever wording. I am not the idiot you obviously take me for. Stop sneaking around and meeting in back rooms making deals with your friends. It will only be a prelude to your criminal investigation. Stop hiding things from me.

Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.

Take a breath. Listen to the people. Let’s just slow down and get some input from some nonpoliticians on the subject. Stop making everything an emergency. Stop speed reading our bills into law. I am not an activist. I am not a community organizer. Nor am I a terrorist, a militant or a violent person. I am a parent and a grandparent. I work. I’m busy. I’m busy. I am busy, and I am tired. I thought we elected competent people to take care of the business of government so that we could work, raise our families, pay our bills, have a little recreation, complain about taxes, endure our hardships, pursue our personal goals, cut our lawn, wash our cars on the weekends and be responsible contributing members of society and teach our children to be the same all while living in the home of the free and land of the brave.

I entrusted you with upholding the Constitution. I believed in the checks and balances to keep from getting far off course. What happened? You are very far off course. Do you really think I find humor in the hiring of a speed reader to unintelligently ramble all through a bill that you signed into law without knowing what it contained? I do not. It is a mockery of the responsibility I have entrusted to you. It is a slap in the face. I am not laughing at your arrogance. Why is it that I feel as if you would not trust me to make a single decision about my own life and how I would live it but you should expect that I should trust you with the debt that you have laid on all of us and our children. We did not want the TARP bill. We said no. We would repeal it if we could. I am sure that we still cannot. There is such urgency and recklessness in all of the recent spending.

From my perspective, it seems that all of you have gone insane. I also know that I am far from alone in these feelings. Do you honestly feel that your current pursuits have merit to patriotic Americans? We want it to stop. We want to put the brakes on everything that is being rushed by us and forced upon us. We want our voice back. You have forced us to put our lives on hold to straighten out the mess that you are making. We will have to give up our vacations, our time spent with our children, any relaxation time we may have had and money we cannot afford to spend on you to bring our concerns to Washington. Our president often knows all the right buzzword is unsustainable. Well, no kidding. How many tens of thousands of dollars did the focus group cost to come up with that word? We don’t want your overpriced words. Stop treating us like we’re morons.

We want all of you to stop focusing on your reelection and do the job we want done, not the job you want done or the job your party wants done. You work for us and at this rate I guarantee you not for long because we are coming. We will be heard and we will be represented. You think we’re so busy with our lives that we will never come for you? We are the formerly silent majority, all of us who quietly work , pay taxes, obey the law, vote, save money, keep our noses to the grindstone and we are now looking up at you. You have awakened us, the patriotic spirit so strong and so powerful that it had been sleeping too long. You have pushed us too far. Our numbers are great. They may surprise you. For every one of us who will be there, there will be hundreds more that could not come. Unlike you, we have their trust. We will represent them honestly, rest assured. They will be at the polls on voting day to usher you out of office. We have canceled vacations. We will use our last few dollars saved. We will find the representation among us and a grassroots campaign will flourish. We didn’t ask for this fight. But the gloves are coming off. We do not come in violence, but we are angry. You will represent us or you will be replaced with someone who will. There are candidates among us when he will rise like a Phoenix from the ashes that you have made of our constitution.

Democrat, Republican, independent, libertarian. Understand this. We don’t care. Political parties are meaningless to us. Patriotic Americans are willing to do right by us and our Constitution and that is all that matters to us now. We are going to fire all of you who abuse power and seek more. It is not your power. It is ours and we want it back. We entrusted you with it and you abused it. You are dishonorable. You are dishonest. As Americans we are ashamed of you. You have brought shame to us. If you are not representing the wants and needs of your constituency loudly and consistently, in spite of the objections of your party, you will be fired. Did you hear? We no longer care about your political parties. You need to be loyal to us, not to them. Because we will get you fired and they will not save you. If you do or can represent me, my issues, my views, please stand up. Make your identity known. You need to make some noise about it. Speak up. I need to know who you are. If you do not speak up, you will be herded out with the rest of the sheep and we will replace the whole damn congress if need be one by one. We are coming. Are we coming for you? Whom do you represent? What do you represent? Listen. Because we are coming. We the people are coming.

Technorati Tags: Letter, open

Liberal view of Obama & mccain

How Liberals view each one.

Technorati Tags: liberal, McCain, Obama, view

For Obama, too soon for another partisan battle

For Obama, too soon for another partisan battle
After a bitter fight on healthcare, the White House has shown little appetite to engage aggressively on immigration and energy initiatives as congressional elections near. President Obama’s victory on healthcare gave him some much-needed political momentum. But he seems disinclined to ride that into another all-in battle this year on his keystone domestic agenda items of climate change and …

Instead, the White House is planning to focus on narrower efforts to pump up the economy, rewrite financial regulation, amend campaign finance laws to limit corporate donations and impose new fees on banks to repay federal bailout funds.

The White House is careful to say that it remains strongly committed to overhauling immigration and limiting greenhouse gases. But so far, the Obama administration has shown little appetite to engage aggressively in crafting legislation and rounding up votes on Capitol Hill for what would probably be deeply partisan fights over those issues as congressional elections near.

Significantly, regardless of the specific issue, Obama so far is following the same playbook he used in the early phase of the healthcare fight: deferring to Congress and giving lawmakers wide latitude in writing legislation and plotting strategy.

“Our approach is to lay out the parameters and to challenge the Congress” to pass bills, said White House senior advisor David Axelrod, adding: “There’s this myth that if the president arrives on the steps of the Capitol with stone tablets, people will bow and vote accordingly. I think that’s a naive view of how laws are made.”

The prospect that the administration will not go all in this year on its signature initiatives alarms several Democratic interest groups. They say a firmer White House hand is needed for the bills to have any chance of passing before November’s midterm elections.

Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice, which advocates for a new immigration system, said that with healthcare, “the mistake [the White House] made was to wait too long and leave Congress in charge of the process for too long. And quite frankly, they’re on the verge of making a similar mistake with immigration reform.”

Similarly, environmentalists want to see action in the Senate on the energy bill that would establish a controversial emissions cap-and-trade system to reduce greenhouse gases.

Stanley Greenberg, a Democratic pollster, said the White House and Democratic congressional leadership “should not . . . move anything that shows gridlock or Democratic division.”

Nevertheless, he said, “I would move on energy. If it’s a bipartisan bill and you bring in nuclear and offshore [drilling], the Republicans are not going to be able to vote against an energy bill that has that.”

The president “has implemented a lot of Republican ideas and goals into broad energy policy,” said Joshua Freed, clean-energy policy director for the centrist Democratic think tank Third Way. “It’s even bigger than saying, ‘I want this in the bill.’ It’s acting.”

With the midterm elections approaching, however, Obama’s hope may be to demonstrate a level of support just high enough to placate immigration and environmental activists. That way, he need not make the all-out commitment that might further erode his approval ratings just when reelection-minded Democrats in Congress need him to be popular.

“Either one of these two items would evoke a long, divisive debate in the Congress,” said William Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former Clinton administration domestic policy aide. “There’s also the question of how much more division and bitter argument the American people are in the mood for right now.

“My own judgment is that people have had about as much partisanship as they can bear and would not welcome a plunge into a new, emotionally charged issue.”

The downside to such an approach is the likely disappointment among blocs of strong Democratic voters.

“At the end of the day, he’ll be judged by whether he delivers change and fights to deliver change,” Sharry said. Blaming the lack of bipartisan cooperation “won’t work well with Latino immigrants. They’ll think Obama promised them and didn’t do enough.”

jtankersley@latimes.com

peter.nicholas@latimes.com

Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times

Technorati Tags: another, battle, Obama, partisan, soon

What is the typical conservative view on the environment?

Like sustainability, biodiversity, climate change, resource depletion, pollution, energy… and governmental regulations concerning the environment, personal responsibilities, etc. Is there a Republican platform on the subject, for example? Or what would someone like Phyllis Schlafly say about the environment?

Technorati Tags: conservative, environment, typical, view

Two Kinds Of Republicans

Newspapers, along with TV anchors and infobabes love to tell stories of dissension within the ranks of the Republican Party. They enjoy pouring fuel on any kind of sparks, trying to fan them into a blaze that negates the effectiveness of any non-Democrat politician. The problem is that there is some basis for the stories about factions within the Grand Old Party.

To those outside, the differences may appear to be simple personality conflicts or random loyalty fights. The fact is it goes much deeper than that. There are really two distinct groups within the party. When things are going well, it’s hard to tell one from the other. However the recent electoral failures have deepened these differences and peeled back the veneer of smiling faces.

The first type is the structural Republican. With these, it is a tradition and they may have been in the party all their lives. They feel a kind of proprietary interest in it. They would vote for anyone as long as they have an R by their name on the ballot and will continue to support them no matter how far they stray from party orthodoxy. Because of their party orientation, these are usually the people who show up at party functions and usually run for party offices.

These are also the people usually anointed to run for elected office. Strong, conservative candidates can break through, but rarely without a knock down, drag out fight. A few years ago Virginia presented a dilemma to the structural Republicans. Oliver North was nominated to run for a senate seat. He was the man and many party insiders gritted their teeth and said they would support him. However Senator John Warner would have nothing of this hero who actually believed in something beyond himself. Warner found someone to run as an independent against Ollie and siphoned off enough votes to insure his defeat. While the grassroots Republicans who secured the North nomination cried “foul”, the party leaders said nothing and did nothing about it. Some even joined the “moderate” Senator in support of the interloper. They believed their role was subordinate to the elected official rather than subordinate to the people!

In spite of this behavioral dissonance, success of the party is their primary interest, often purity on policy questions will be sacrificed for expediency. This is justified by considering ten or twenty percent disagreement still means eighty or ninety percent agreement. In many ways there is virtue to this thinking as this is how coalitions are built, but at times it ignores critical shortcomings on core issues.

The second type is the issue Republican. For them, their issue is of primary importance and the Republican Party is simply the best vehicle for promoting it. These issues can be second amendment rights, ending abortion or low taxes and small government. This last group seems to get the kindest reception from the structural Republicans, but still none are completely trusted by structural Republicans as support may and has been withheld for failures to live up to promises on the part of elected officials and candidates.

This group tends to be fragmented and parochial in its dedication to a particular issue. The people don’t mix well, even with other issue oriented types in spite of the fact that they really are in general agreement. That is, most gun rights people are pro-life, and most pro-lifers are sympathetic to gun owners concerns, but the difference in emphasis keeps them apart. The low taxers tend to be suspicious of anyone concerned with social issues… even though the gun people and anti-abortion activists almost invariably support smaller, less expensive and intrusive government.

Many of the the structural Republicans don’t trust the issue Republicans because they believe in something beyond deal making and going along to get along. They have goals that reach beyond getting elected or re-elected. Sometimes they may even take actions that hurt their chances if they must to do the right thing. But then, the issue types have learned not to trust the structural Republicans because of the many broken promises that result in their devalued issues being thrown under the bus on some compromise.

During the past administration, we saw many Republicans go to Washington after campaigning on low tax and smaller government platforms, only to have their arms twisted into, or perhaps catching beltway fever and willingly, going along with the inflated budgets and intrusive schemes coming from a Republican administration. It’s no wonder that their rhetoric rings hollow in the ears of an angry and frustrated electorate. They have compromised and moderated themselves and their party into minority status… and many of them right out of office.

It may take a whole new crop of candidates to take back the party and the congress, much like Newt Gingrich did when he led in forming the Contract with America. It may take a group of men and women honestly willing to pledge their “fortunes and sacred honor” to get the job done. Even though elected officials are often called “The Honorable”, this type of personal honor is a rarity in today’s government. What kind of people have this sense of focus and personal honor? The kind of people who believe in something and have a sense of right and wrong. The kind that will sacrifice personal ambition for the good of the country.

The structural Republicans will say “Wait a minute, we have these qualities.” The compromised values and abandoned principles tell another story. Back in the early days of GOPAC, one of the primary ideas they tried to get across to those looking at elected office was that they should run because they wanted to DO something, not because they wanted to BE something.

Sure, some compromise is inevitable, but it should not become a way of life, and some things are just non-negotiable. If being a Republican is to mean something, it is essential that the people running under that banner have some sort of agreement on where to stand. As Amos 3:3 asks, “Can two walk together, except they be agreed?”

Neither group can win consistently by itself. A mutual respect and appreciation for the others contribution is needed. A willingness to stand up for another persons interest is essential to forming a winning team. Structural types need to stand up for gun rights, unborn children and limited government rather than dismissing the issues as unimportant. They need to get out of the way when an issue oriented candidate excites the base and the public. Single issue voters need to begin looking at the bigger picture, become more involved in party processes and realize that by helping people with the other primary concerns, theirs too shall be addressed.

The Democratic Party sold it’s soul to follow a smooth talking shyster who waived before them an ambiguous, self-defined regimen of hope and change… and we are all paying for it… and will be paying for it as far as the eye can see. They have set aside principles to follow a man. We are a country of laws, not men. The Republican Party needs to, once again, be a party of principles, not men. The fate of the party and the country hangs on it.

Technorati Tags: Kinds, Republicans

ELECTION ‘08 – THE LIBERAL VIEW PART 2 – JILL ADAMS

realpundits.com is a website dedicated to the political opinions of real people. If you have a youtube video or written article with your opinion about politics we would like to hear from you. Every day thousands of videos are uploaded to the web, real people commenting on real political issues and every aspect of the American election. Obama’s big speech, Sarah Palin’s past – political commentators far from the mainstream media are setting down their thoughts and uploading them to be argued over and debated by political junkies across the world. There’s so much it can be hard to find the best. And that’s where Real Pundits comes in. Every day our team of editors trawl the web for the brightest, funniest, or most provocative videos uploaded by you. Want to know what real people think about mccain’s war record or whether Bill and Barack will ever patch things up? Forget the talk shows and old media. Ask the Real Pundits. Click here for part one: realpundits.com

Technorati Tags: ADAMS, election, JILL, liberal, part, view