Saturday, April 24, 2010
The Group Obama Democrats want to remain free: Illegal Immigrants
NBC embraces slander of Arizona
NBC video slanders AZ Governor by stating “Arizona embraces profiling” on the headline of their video, in spite of the Governors statement at signing that she would demand basically a fair balance between the Bill she signed today and the law which prohibits racial profiling.
While Obama called the Bill she signed ‘misdirected’, NM Governor Bill Richardson acknowledges huge problems in AZ. with illegal’s crossing the border, and the Federal Governments laissez-faire, or doctrine that an economic system functions best when there is no interference by government. It is based on the belief that the natural economic order tends, when undisturbed by artificial stimulus or regulation, to secure the maximum well-being for the individual and therefore for the community as a whole.
This seems to be just about the only issue the Democrats seem to embrace laissez-fair, because they are into controlling everyone’s health care, the finances of all the banks, WallStreet, and every business in America, as well as Cap & Trade Global Warming.
So let’s get this straight; Democrats want to control the food ( Codex Alimentarius officially covers all foods) water and air everyone breaths, they want to control the doctors, the bankers, the lawyers, the insurance industry, WallStreet executives, main street CEO’s, but they don’t want to control of “illegal immigration” and the “illegal aliens” from entering the country illegally? What is their interest?
While the rest of America is subject to ‘controls’ in nearly every aspect of our lives, every American reporting taxes, employment, and getting licenses for near every aspect of our lives including, birth certificates, ( accept for Obama who has never had to show a long form birth certificate to any official and made his first executive order about his executive privilege not to), drivers licenses, business licenses this is the one area, and the only people they don’t want reporting to them, and don’t want control over, Why would that be?
Can you say massive instant legalization of immigration to ‘control’ the election through the flood of voters created, and Democrats are happy to provide the flood of immigration with a subsidy of about everything they could want much less need, just for their vote?
When we were bombed, or invaded, at Pearl Harbor the need for ‘profiling’ came into play for reasonable protections. The U.S. Japanese citizenry were put out of their way for the way in which they looked upon because of the danger that had proceeded. We tend to forget safety for the Japanese was a strong consideration for the Japanese encampments, not just national security.
So how does that compare to the illegal infiltration of mainly acknowledged Hispanic population from Mexico and the relatively large drug war being conducted as well the secure enforcement of our borders from say illegal substances or in a worst case scenario, a lost nuke-case being smuggled over our borders into the wrong hands, while we are have two wars going on by the admission of most everyone in Congress and that man living in the White House?
Arizona is being very gentle and considerate of a large portion of their population who most assuredly understand what the Governor said, in essence, “ This is for the protection of every Arizona Citizen, and at the same time we want to uphold every citizens Constitutional rights.”
On the bully empire pulpit considering Az. Sen. Bill 1070, Obama, in a wildly power hungry remark exemplifying runaway Federal Control over States, declared essentially that the lack of Federal Control in States creates “irresponsibility in others” meaning State Governors and State Law Makers are irresponsible without the Federal Government Controlling them, or in other words, States being allowed to make laws that suit their particular needs are irresponsible.
While Rachel Maddow, of the Rachel Maddow Show, said they were referring to this bill as the “papers please” bill, one possible reason she does so maybe a reasonable fear that Obama may have to show his papers proving he is a natural born citizen. Natural Born Citizens are those having been born by two U.S. Citizens and being born within the United States, so as to clear by two generations any ties to a foreign government.
The Constitutional Qualification only applies to United States President our forefathers reasonable considered because of the control of armies and the highest office within the Executive Branch an office demanded every ‘natural safe guard’ possible within natural law of at least two generation. Rachel often backs her claim of Obama’s citizenship based upon 2 newspaper announcement of birth that Hawaii’s Department of Health places upon any request of any ‘birth certificate’ applied for including those born abroad, as well those actually in Hawaii. So we have never seen Obama’s long form birth certificate, no one has. Could it be it doesn’t exist?
It is easily understood that the Framers were indeed born within the United States borders before the adoption of the Constitution, but did not consider themselves Natural Born Citizens, because they and their parents were not, thus in order to make for their own exceptions, they included the phrase, “Or a citizen at the time of the adoption of this Constitution”. George Washington himself was 55 years old when the Constitution was adopted in 1776. He and his parents had actually lived under the rule of Britain as British subjects to the King, the same citizenship subjection that Obama’s father had but they didn’t leave a grandfather clause open in the Constitution to include Obama, but The British Nationality Act does:
Barack Obama Sr. as a British citizen and subject to the laws of the British Nationality Act 1948 (BNA). The following sections establish that Obama Jr. was subject to the same laws at birth:
e.“ (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act (1948) shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.”
You can’t be a duel citizen and President or Vice President and those guys probably don’t want American tax payer to know that illegal immigration is costing them about 13 billion a year.
Friday, April 23, 2010
"A trillion dollars gets spent, and it's no surprise — health care costs are going to go up," said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., a leading Republican on health care issues. Camp added that he's concerned the Medicare cuts will undermine care for seniors.
What? We all know when everyone joins in, or you had a lot of everything, the value or cost is suppose to go down. So why's it different when the Government gets involved? Is it really all backwards?
So if they are going up, there was no need to initiate it in the first place? Why doesn’t he just say something like, “The truth is when the Government takes your tax money it suddenly isn’t worth half as much, so whatever we’re doing for you cost more.” I mean we could understand that because it’s happened so many times.
That just shows ya Republicans are in the mix to make it a campaign issue. Problem is they need to make some sense of it the right way instead of throwing non-sense around like this.
“In another flashing yellow light, the report warned that a new voluntary long-term care insurance program created under the law faces "a very serious risk" of insolvency”.
I wonder if that word is in the Democrats vocabulary, they created a positive incentive to go out on the dole and they will soon find the truth out about "feeding a man a fish" rather than "teaching him how to fish".
The trumpet of so many Democrats was 'its not fair that we have to pay insurance and there's people who don't and then run to the emergency room', and they used this as a crutch for what?
Well, this is about to get really harry, because the incentive for care just went up 100 fold because everyone's going to want a doctor tucking them in bed every night and then be asking for 10 drinks of water.
As cost increase you'll find a dis incentive or a hopeless state set in. Why work? It's doesn't pay.
The report's most sober assessments concerned Medicare.
In addition to flagging provider cuts as potentially unsustainable, the report projected that reductions in payments to private Medicare Advantage plans would trigger an exodus from the popular alternative. Enrollment would plummet by about 50 percent. Seniors leaving the private plans would still have health insurance under traditional Medicare, but many might face higher out-of-pocket costs.
As soon as everyone is hopelessly unemployed and on the Government dole, the Democrats will introduce slavery back into the mix and force will replace freedom, because rather than say it doesn't work they'll say YOU’RE the reason it doesn't work, but we’re gonna make it work, and make you work.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100423/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_law_costsWenzel noted some of the details of Obama's health-care program have begun to emerge this month, "revealing far more restrictions and taxes than first advertised."
Democrat faith in Obama plunges as health-care details are emerging. Those who believe freedoms are increasing has dropped 10 percent says a report from WND here.
Thought I’d write a little piece today because it’s Friday, on how your support makes a difference. There is so much cynicism in the world today that many people simply believe that they do not count; their support, their opinion, even their vote doesn’t count or make a difference.
Well, changing someone’s mind is never very easy, in fact I’m a firm believer in your mind not changing, but rather simply believing in what you knew all along. The recognition of truth is not something any of us are foreigners to. We all can recognize it so in some sense no one can fool anyone… might I add here for very long.
People do wake up to being fooled and lied to, and like a burr under your blanket, sometimes that’s what’s needed unfortunately to get you off the couch and into supporting good causes that affect your life and the life’s of future generations.
I recently witnessed an exchange between two teenage girls and their checker at a store. I was standing next in line. Well, before that I was in another line and the checker had just got there. She checked this guys donuts up and told him how much it was, he handed her a twenty, and she opened her till to find she didn’t have any change to give him.
She exclaimed kind of loudly, “I don’t have any money! Haah, that’s never happened to me before!” I chuckled and with my quick wit exclaimed, “Happens to me all the time.”, to which everyone standing in line got a good laugh. That’s when the girls behind me moved over to the other line, and I followed suit, accept now they were ahead of me.
The thought went through my mind, “Hey, I was ahead of you guys”, but I kept quiet and thought it doesn’t matter really they have just a few items. They were rung up and paid their money for the few items. This checker did have some money to give them change.
As the checker was handing them their dollars, the girl said, “and I don’t need those pennies”, and walked off with her friend briskly. The checker had shut her drawer already so was somewhat perplexed on what to do, so she set them aside until her drawer opened again. She rang my things up, and I commented to the checker smiling a little, “Those girls must not know that dollars are made up of pennies; each one counts.” To which she responded thoughtfully, “Yes”.
The thought went through my mind of the reasons I pick up every penny, or piece of change off the ground I happened to find. I don’t have a running total, but I imagine somewhere in heaven someone will be able to tell me how many I picked up over my life and it should make for a good laugh. Wouldn’t that be funny if some angel in heaven gives me a total, “yeah, you picked up a cool million down there, nice job”.
Well, it’s not really my need for cash, but it’s the words “In God We Trust”, that really gets me and that I can’t seem to walk over or pass up. Another confession, I recently picked out of a urinal 16 cents. Yeah that’s gross I know, but I just couldn’t go number 1 on that “In God We Trust”. So, I flushed it a couple of times and picked it out went over and washed it and my hands, and felt better about relieving myself with the ‘change’, and the ‘trust’ in my pocket.
We all see a need for some change and sometimes that change is getting back to what we knew or a restoration of what is good; we know that little changes make up big ones, but often we count ourselves out as being an important part of the change because we are only 1 cent, 1 vote, 1 voice,1 person. Did you know nearly 34%+ of you don’t vote, which is easily enough to win an election split 3 ways.
In fact in a recent article in USA Today entitled “Frustrated voters cut ties with Democrats and Republicans, it was reported the fastest growing political group was the “none of the above” or "unaffiliated” party. Unaffiliated voters now outnumber Democrats and Republicans in nine states: Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey and Rhode Island.
Like those girls who said we don’t want those pennies, I can’t imagine not being wanted in the ‘Trust of God’, or in the ‘In God We Trust’ of our money. We all have felt that way some time in our life I’m sure; like change that wasn’t needed, or was thrown on the ground.
That’s why I decided to thank each and every one of you for being my friend on facebook and being part of my change, and our change, in restoring the confidence and trust in our U.S Constitution, each and every one of you really do count.
Wither your supporting with dollars, time, or just association, no matter what state you’re in, you do count as one, who like I, want to see our freedoms and liberties maintained.
I appreciate you and together each of us making up 1 appreciates, like a savings account that earns interest, we grow. Each one of us is a “Shiny Penny” that is not to be discarded.
The new pennies released in 2009 show 4 different times in Lincoln’s life and relate E Pluribus Unum which describes an action: “Many uniting into one”. An accurate translation of the motto is "Out of many, one", on the back of the coin. The front of the coin hasn’t changed. “In God We Trust” and Lincoln’s profile shot. I wrote a number of years ago that when we failed to put our “Trust” in God with our money, our money would fail us.
A little history of just how those words came to be on our money I found interesting:
[The Congressional Record in 1956 reads: "At the present time the United States has no national motto. The committee deems it most appropriate that 'In God we trust' be so designated as U.S. national motto."
The motto In God We Trust was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the American Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout Christians throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize God on United States coins. From Treasury Department records, it appears that the first such appeal came in a letter dated November 13, 1861. It was written to Secretary Salmon P. Chase by Reverend M. R. Watkinson, Minister of the Gospel from Ridley Township, Pennsylvania, and read:
Dear Sir: You are about to submit your annual report to the Congress respecting the affairs of the national finances. One fact touching our currency has hitherto been seriously overlooked. I mean the recognition of the Almighty God in some form on our coins. You are probably a Christian. What if our Republic were not shattered beyond reconstruction? Would not the antiquaries of succeeding centuries rightly reason from our past that we were a heathen nation? What I propose is that instead of the goddess of liberty we shall have next inside the 13 stars a ring inscribed with the words PERPETUAL UNION; within the ring the allseeing eye, crowned with a halo; beneath this eye the American flag, bearing in its field stars equal to the number of the States united; in the folds of the bars the words GOD, LIBERTY, LAW. This would make a beautiful coin, to which no possible citizen could object. This would relieve us from the ignominy of heathenism. This would place us openly under the Divine protection we have personally claimed. From my heart I have felt our national shame in disowning God as not the least of our present national disasters.
As a result, Secretary Chase instructed James Pollock, Director of the Mint at Philadelphia, to prepare a motto, in a letter dated November 20, 1861:
Dear Sir: No nation can be strong except in the strength of God, or safe except in His defense. The trust of our people in God should be declared on our national coins. You will cause a device to be prepared without unnecessary delay with a motto expressing in the fewest and tersest words possible this national recognition.
It was found that the Act of Congress dated January 18, 1837, prescribed the mottoes and devices that should be placed upon the coins of the United States. This meant that the mint could make no changes without the enactment of additional legislation by Congress. In December 1863, the Director of the Mint submitted designs for a new one-cent coin, two-cent coin, and three-cent coin to Secretary Chase for approval. He proposed that upon the designs either OUR COUNTRY, OUR GOD or GOD, OUR TRUST should appear as the motto on the coins. In a letter to the Mint Director on December 9, 1863, Secretary Chase stated:
I approve your mottoes, only suggesting that on that with the Washington obverse the motto should begin with the word OUR, so as to read OUR GOD AND OUR COUNTRY. And on that with the shield, it should be changed so as to read: IN GOD WE TRUST.]
It’s amazing how much all those pennies can add up to, and never forget that your vote counts, and when you vote you do have the power to change things because you’re not alone.
I'd like to remind Registered Utah Voters, I’m looking to get 1,000 signatures to get on the ballot in Utah. I hope you will help me out and help provide another choice for all the voters in the coming November 2010 election. Thank you again for any and all you do.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Locking up the Wheels that turn America
HR 4173 or Emperor Obama will collapse Wall Street
If you’ve ever run a business the incentive for good decisions is failure. Fear of Failure is what makes ‘good decisions’ more likely. The lack of failure provides an incentive for bad decision because of the lack of a penalty. Companies, who have learned this, have come to manipulate the Government as a saving agent for bad decisions and thus presumably gain control of the Government. Its irony, bad financial decisions equals control of the Government, and thus The People.
HR 4173 is akin to a Wallmart threatening to let out violent offenders of the penitentiaries, if the State doesn’t give them more money. It amounts to black balling the Government and I think Barrack Obama’s too stupid to figure that out, or he is essentially in collaboration to collapse WallStreet and thus MainStreet America. Hey, wait a minute; doesn’t The People control the Government and thus the penitentiaries?
Another thing, does the needs or model for business change all that much from the time a business is small to the time where it becomes 1 of the 50 biggest? So… how can the word failure not be applied to a large holding as it does to a small holding? When a large holding fails, there are smaller ones under it to catch the debris as it falls. It’s not the end of the world as we know it.
Here are a few details of HR 4173 that are enough to dry up the grease in any business wheel barring and lock’em up.
EMERGENCY EXCEPTION TO MAJORITY VOTE OF COUNCIL REQUIREMENT
[If each of the Secretary of the Treasury, the Board, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation determines that a financial company must be subjected to stricter prudential standards in accordance
with this section immediately to prevent destabilization of the financial system or economy, the Secretary, the Board, and the Corporation may, upon approval by the President, subject such company to stricter prudential standards under this section.] What the hell does he know?
[The heightened standards imposed by the Board under this section shall include— risk-based capital requirements; leverage limits; liquidity requirements; concentration requirements prompt corrective action requirements, resolution plan requirements, overall risk management requirements; and may establish short-term debt limits] Can you say every facet is covered?
[In order to limit the risks that the failure of any company could pose to a financial holding company subject to stricter standards and to the stability of the United States financial system, the Board, by regulation, shall prescribe standards that limit the risks posed by the exposure of a financial holding company subject to stricter standards to any other company.]
That sounds like Main Street to me and it really sounds like financial holding companies can’t even ascertain the legitimacy of smaller businesses assets and liabilities, how’s the Government going to be able to?
(Limits credit exposure to 25% of credit stock.)
If you’ve ever been a CEO, and realized a downturn, you probably went out on a limb over the 25% just to make payroll, are we going to let the government all of a sudden collapse a business because an owner is trying to make payroll?
Oh and hey you’ll die laughing, well not really, when you get to the incentives for whistle blowers, and the superimposed binding judicial branch of Government created right inside HR 4173.
If you’ve ever run a business, you have ideal standards and then the reality standards. Most times the reality standards aren’t ideal, but they get you buy, make a payroll, and squeak you by in the ebb and flow of fluctuating business markets that cannot be controlled or calculated for say things we have no control over, the weather, population shifts, seasons, and even more flippantly the style or taste, or desire of demographic populations that constantly change.
If the government can’t tell businesses that ultimately they will not bail them out and failure, or some bankruptcy court, is the ultimatum then you know the Government has succumb to the Giant Corporation or Banker’s wishes, and thus the printing of currency has shifted from the Government to the Banks.
Regulatory framework is already in place but the political will to enforce it has been absent, thus creating a new bureaucratic Council is really a waste, accept for the ‘control’ of Government, which gains quite handsomely.
In the simple gathering of information in order to verify what an institution or financial company is all about, no less the 50 biggest U.S. companies and sub companies on down, would take something bigger than the IRS if you just think about it. The audits are legal to actually just see “if” you pose a threat to financial security.
Not limited to U.S. Markets, the Financial Services Oversight council controls anything remotely within the concept of U.S. Financial Markets and also has to oversee World Markets to determine and assess U.S. competitive disadvantages that might be working. If there ever was another Kraken in the Ocean besides Healthcare, the release of this beast is it.
While the Kraken monstrosity in Clash of the Titans was turned to stone by the head of Medusa; in theory, the head of Medusa should be held by the Government in the simple word “Failure”, because you’re not too big to fail.
Government should never forget the “key” to businessmen making good decisions themselves is the ultimate penalty of failure and not Government regulation in business they know less about and The People should not blame the government for the freedom to fail as it also provides the key to success.
Thomas Jefferson related, ‘A wise and frugal Government which shall restrain men from hurting one another; shall leave them otherwise “free” to “regulate” their own pursuits of industry and improvement.
Read the Bill HR 4173 http://docs.house.gov/rules/finserv/111_hr_finsrv.pdf
updated: video regarding HR 4173 and Obama's push
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
The sign reads “You Deserve a Bailout Too”, and advertises a carton of cigarettes. Is the Federal Bailout Program as addictive as nicotine because if it is, our politicians are becoming chain smokers?
Ironically there may be more to this than meets the eye if we dig a little deeper. It’s not news that smoking cigarettes can increase your chances for cancer, increase those pursing wrinkles around your beautiful lips, reduce your ability to some activities that require stamina, and lead to a shorter life span.
Rather than list every bailout here is a link that gives a list of the 700 Billion included inTARP and an itemization of the commitments of over 12 Trillion, yes the big T which stands for “Governments Tab in Trillions”.
Like smoking cigarettes, the Government Bailouts can cause some of the same symptoms.
Increase the chances for cancer
A new catch phrase entered our psyche in 2008 “too big to fail”. We hadn’t heard or dared to utter that sentence that I can recall with memories of the Hindenburg and Titanic, but it crept back into our daily coms with businesses that in deed had failed for whatever reason.
Before I get jumped for being unsympathetic to those who may lose their jobs without a government bailout money let me state I’ve been on that receiving end when one day you’re going to work thinking all is well with your job and the next day the company is no more and you all get pink slips without any warning. It is very unnerving, but there are worse things that can happen, and believe it or not there are good things still happening in your life. The suns coming up, the seasons are a changing and your alignment with positive forces is at hand; and, there are always positive forces happening.
Now let me get back to those businesses deemed “too big to fail” and our discussion. Can bailouts cause cancer? What is a cancer but an unwanted growth that starts to feed off of the life of the body? The cancer wants a life of its own and begins taking over and infecting more and more of the body. One cancer recently proposed in Obama’s regime was legislation that last I heard had already passed the House in which the Government can come into your business, fire the President, take over the business if a public interest is deemed appropriate by the Government.
This in affect negates all the hard work a business owner may have suffered at the hands of the Government through the early hard years of building where you’re not too big to fail. Now your decisions are trumped by the Governments and it all was created by a mentality that “you’re too big to fail”.
Well, at what point in the business decision making process does the Government decide your decisions as a business owner are not appropriate? Was it just before that risky new gadget that they don’t think will sell comes out, but actually becomes a hit and doubles your income? Or was it that property you bought that was abit risky and put your sales to debt ratio at an inappropriate and unsafe level?
Updated here 4-22-2010 read newest attack on Constitution
Pursing wrinkles around the beautiful lips
Are regulations and industries unregulated when it comes to profit, really what the Government is seeking as a free radical hoping to cling to and begin sucking for life on, as a cancer? Personally I know of no other thing that would cause an owner, president, or C.E.O. of a business to receive the pursing wrinkles around the beautiful lips then seeing their company taken, and their advice and counsel overrun by someone like Obama. I mean can’t you just see the pursing of the lips? These are actually premature aging wrinkles and as the cancer sets in with the Government takeover, we can assume in their own way of doing business; over borrowing, selling out to foreign interest, and a complete disregard for living within their means that premature wrinkles in the business are pretty much a foregone conclusion. In the name of “too big to fail’ already, we have seen Obama regime single out CEOs of automotive manufacturing corporations, financial industries, drug manufacturers, and health insurance companies for special, public floggings. Surprise? President Obama has found a convenient, new villain, Goldman Sachs, to be publicly filleted, to help drive support for the President’s new, financial regulations and bank oversight legislation, more free radicals running through all in the name of “too big to fail”.
Smoking can reduce your ability to some activities that require stamina
I know because I smoked for a few years and noticed. The good news seems to be the ability of the lungs to regenerate and repair if permanent damage hasn’t happened yet. So, in business what requires stamina is sometimes not growing too fast, patience, and again that ‘risk’ taking when the feeling strikes you as a safe bet, or spiritually speaking, your moved by the Spirit after prayer. Ok, how can that be, a little example?
I have to relate when I was laid off at that business that sold I’d worked 5 years for, I’d started another business and signed a lease not 3 weeks prior. Of course getting laid off wasn’t in my business plan at all in fact just the opposite. With the bad news coming and in my shock and horror I knew I was put at a much higher rate of risk making a new business a primary source of income rather than a second depending on the first as a backup.
Interestingly enough, 1 week before that business was sold handing us all pink slips, I’d related a dream to many of my colleagues of a tornado coming through the business and all of us running for our ‘jobs’ (which seemed almost out of place, instead of the word “lives”) I made it out of the building in my dream and stood at an intersection wondering which way to go. I looked up and saw the traffic light was ‘green’. That’s when I woke up.
When the news come in the business had been sold, and they only wanted the equipment and stock, I reflected upon the intersection and wondered about my new endeavor not able to calculate opening business cost because of so many variables and types of equipment needed.
I recalled the “green light” and felt a sure feeling that God had calculated them for me and I was to proceed with the new business rather than try to get out of the lease. The business was opened with my last few dollars going to buy the OPEN sign. I never attributed that inspiration to being ‘lucky’.
Though after 2 years that business “was allowed” to fail, it was my place of employment for that period of time, and just as it provided some relief during that time, other things came into view on the horizon I hadn’t expected, nor could have calculated.
With the risk had come the reward, and that’s why I think it’s so important for America never to be ‘too big to fail’, because being ‘to big to fail’ is really a statement that clips the wings of an eagle that can truly soar, and saying it’s just as beautiful in a cage. What can ‘freedom’ do if it’s allowed to soar? Great heights that might not have been reached otherwise are now possible if it’s protected.
Life span is foreseeable as being cut short
As our Government has grown and as our regulations have increased and as our debt also has increased, something is happening that is very apparent to so many people. America’s life span is foreseeable as being cut short and subdivided. Our freedoms and liberties are being systematically clipped with little regard for the heights also being clipped in the dissemination of our Constitution which has allowed great heights in the past.
Nowhere is this more apparent than in the political head of our Executive Branch being constitutionally unqualified and allowed to infect the body politic like a cancer who wants its own life at the cost of ours. While policy after policy is fought courageously sometimes and fictiously by the major opposing party, in the end Americans are losing at the great cost of keeping politicians deemed “too big to fail”.
America, it’s time for some chemotherapy to rid ourselves of the cancers in our body politic.
When a problem infects the credibility of a product or brand, you have to ‘restore’ it to the consumers. Toyota is working hard on the gas pedals in the biggest recall in history. America has the same problem with Obama. The world’s confidence in us as leaders has been hurt by the seeming disregard of our own Constitution. Hence, to restore confidence in America and to restore confidence with our citizens a restoration in our Constitution is paramount. That requires Obama leave the White House as he is not a natural born citizen.
Petitions you can sign here http://www.codyjudy.us/crj4ussenatorut_002.htm
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Debbie Schlussel's is always an interesting read and I really like tuning into her blog to catch the latest movie review or political jab, but as a golfer I just had to weigh in on the other side of the balance as I read her blog entitled ironically " Think Tiger Woods Would Do This?", instead of “Look What Davis Did”.
Debbie trumped golfer Brian Davis's two stroke penalty on himself for nicking a loose reed on his backswing and costing himself the difference in first and second place roughly $400,000, however that’s not what lost him the tournament. I beg to differ, it cost Brian Davis nothing.
Brian Davis lost when his second shot from the fairway went into the hazard at Calibogie Sound. After a birdie on the 18th first time around to tie Jim Furyk he hit an errant fairway shot. This is where he lost the tournament. Calling the two shot penalty was just a slap on the left side of the face after getting slapped on the right side and took everyone’s mind off the shots that did cost him the tournament.
She remarked, "The Brit penalized himself two strokes on a playoff hole, and as I read this, I thought, Tiger Woods would never do this. The man simply doesn’t have the integrity of Davis. Never had it, never will,” and then includes a remark slamming all American Golfers by Brian Dryfhout, writing at mouthpiecesports.com, seems to think honor might be ingrained in players from the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.
There are just a few things Debbie either doesn't know, failed to state, or just plainly is not considering that are very important.
When a golfer calls a penalty on himself, he does so with integrity no doubt, but let’s be realistic here, he also does so with the fear that, ‘an official may have seen it and could contend his failure to call it on himself when he enters the score room, thereby eliminating himself from the tournament completely in a DQ or disqualification.
Especially in a playoff scenario, talk about being under a microscope, Davis would have been a fool not to call this on himself and risk not getting the $615,000, because of his failure. Call it honest foresight, or not being a fool, in realizing you’re under a microscope in a playoff. This is not to demean Davis for his call, for he did have integrity for calling it on himself, but he also had $615,000 instead of a DQ and a fine.
DQ’s have happened to plenty of golfers for relative what novices may call small offenses in the 2007 PGA Championship I was there when Sergio Garcia was disqualified after signing an incorrect scorecard after the third round Garcia, who had just three-putted the 18th hole, signed for a par 4 on No. 17 when he actually made a bogey and left the scoring area at Southern Hills Country Club. Garcia's score should have been 4-over-par 74, which would have left him at 9 over for the championship, but he instead turned in a 73. This is not a sport where the officials call you back in and point out your mistake, the axe falls very hard so you better be on guard.
Unfortunately, to my own chagrin, I’ve been penalized myself for 5 years with 10 years to go, for showing a changed score card to someone who was not an official scorekeeper, nor did I turn in the card or pretend to turn it in or think about turning it in. I had withdrawn from the tournament completely, and thought wrong about being cute in showing a false score to someone. It was reported and I’ve been suspended ever since and I hate it and I’m starting to think in some ways the PGA is a good ole boys club, and I’ve been penalized so severely for “other reasons” to get me off the tournament circuit, but I digress.
Debbie rains a shower of praise on Davis, without stating he may have had to in order to stay in the money, and surmises off the course that Tiger’s private life fiasco somehow translates to what he would do on the course, which undermines the professional integrity of the golf game itself and all of golf’s rules and officials and this is not a slam on Tiger but, I believe an unintended consequence of the media in general, not just Debbie, placing misdirected blame where it doesn’t belong, and to that I must mount a defense both the game of golf and the integrity of the field and it’s associates, as well the integrity of Tiger’s, yes, moral compass.
Quoting from an article called Tiger: I was a living a lie http://www.insidegolf.ca/content/view/109957/366/ and reported on the golf channel,
“ Tiger Woods acknowledged "living a lie," saying he alone was responsible for the sex scandal that caused his downfall and that no one in his inner circle was aware of his misdeeds.
"It was all me. I'm the one who did it. I'm the one who acted the way I acted. No one knew what was going on when it was going on,"
Debbie, in front of all your colleagues and fans could you possibly understand the level courage this took if you yourself acknowledged in front of everyone your own indiscretions as Tiger has done. I grasp some concept of that, but it is a bitter cup of which it is very easy to shrink from.
Not to be outdone by this or to be remiss of the lapse of the media mixing up professional and personal all up in a big batch on everyone else but themselves, Debbie makes no mention of the same thing happening with Phil Mickelson’s off field personal circumstances and trials in the professional record. She states:
“Oh, and BTW, last week, I showed you the ridiculous USA Today Sports Section cover when Phil Mickelson won the Masters. The photo sizes made it look like Woods won for certain, even though he barely tied for fourth place.”
What may be ridiculous in the professional coverage is rather then extol how Phil Mickelson won the Masters with a few record sentences of his daring shots, the paragraph mentions 1 sentence of his golf triumph, and 5 lines of his wife and mothers record of beating back cancer. So it’s the same philosophy going both ways, Mickelson highlighted for his off record trials, and Tiger also.
This is not to say that either of these can’t be highlighted in their own accord, but there’s a real scalding caldron on mixing up all the stories and trying to make cookies. I think about how Schlussel has been cited by liberal media watchdog Media Matters seven times regarding accusations of Schlussel spreading misinformation. Schlussel has responded by calling Media Matters "nazi-collaborators and maybe they were or are, but I look at Tigers example of taking the heat responsibly and not calling the Media or anyone names and I think, ‘there’s a free lesson for everyone.’
Tiger’s level of play on the course is not to be slammed with his personal life off the field, accept in a confusion of the subjects. He has played and followed the very strict rules of golf unwaveringly and I personally have enormous respect for his professional management of golf on the field and it’s important to note that when all is said and done, Tiger broke no rule on the field which prohibits his being a competitor.
And off the field, I get really tired of the virtues of men with women like Moses Abraham and David being so unselectively considered, but that’s another story where I think our society is to blame for confusing moralities about marriage and the laws of nature differing in genders.
Deb, I don’t think I could ever not be a fan of yours with that beautiful brain of yours.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Recently Gigi Bowman of Facebook's Liberty Candidates Group with over 4200 members ( http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=109458005755351#!/group.php?gid=196730146003 )wrote to me : "Are we going to let these groups strong arm us and tell us how to run our campaigns based on their skewed logic of Liberty & Freedom? These groups that only believe in the Constitution when it's convenient?"
Yet I am the only U.S. Senate Candidate in Utah that has stood up and been an Article II Patriot and put my own money to work for defending the Constitution in bringing the argument to the court on Obama and McCain's elegibility.
Yet, I am deemed NOT a worthy "Liberty Candidate" here. Seems GiGi's last words are apparently true of this group also, "they believe in the Constitution when it's convenient", how else can you look at it?
While I respect the hard work GiGi and this group is doing, they are still bent on being seen by the public as good rather then being seen by the Constitution as being good and that by their own standard of reviewing candidates.
I say, be true to your principles and the other will come around. But when you denie the principles you are saying your upholding, you kinda of shoot yourself in the foot GiGi and if you haven't learned that yet.. you got a good lesson with the pitted letter a portion of which I relate here:
"Gigi Bowman April 17 at 7:47am ReplyOn April 15th, Tax Day, and the of the eve of the Liberty Candidate Money Bomb, I received a letter in my mailbox from firstname.lastname@example.org aka Susan Wolf.
The signatories of this letter were the following groups:
This letter was cc'd to every liberty candidate as well.
We have no idea whom else they sent it to but I'm sure the list went far and wide.
A Classic smear campaign with perfect timing.
The letter was titled:
An Open Letter to the “Liberty Candidates”
Regarding: Adam Kokesh
and it went like this:
We are writing to you to express our grave concerns about one of your fellow Liberty candidates, Adam Kokesh. More importantly, in view of these concerns and to the point of this letter, we are asking that you disavow Mr. Kokesh and distance yourself from him politically.
..the Liberty Candidates know why they should distance themselves from Patriot and Congressional Candidate Adam Kokesh. In their OPINION.... "
While this may appear to be a divisive in nature it is actually a plea to GiGi and many others involved that hopefully we can settle this matter in looking through the Constitution's eyes, rather then what the media says is popular. It's just fundamental politics and I think if you want to be true to a cause you really can't dismiss someone like myself who has been fighting for an issue where so many others have shrunk... that's OUR Constitution they are shrinking from.