The sudden death of Associate Justice Antonin Scalia has dealt a gut punch to the Republican Party. It is something they couldn't wait minutes before announcing that President Obama cannot replace him on the nation's highest court. Why? Because he's a lame duck. Didn't Ronald Reagan nominate Anthony Kennedy to the Supreme Court when he was a lame duck? (Let's check the record.)
I find that ironic, since Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution enumerates that it is the president's expressed power to nominate Supreme Court justices (how about that Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL)?). Of course, that is with the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY, by way of Alabama), is sure that he can mire any Obama nominee in senatorial minutiae, until Hillary Clinton is sworn in as president on January 20, 2017. (Wouldn't that be ironic and just desserts?)
Until then, the U.S. Supreme Court may divided in its votes on important court issues facing it, with only eight members. In such a case, the court could be divided by series of 4-to-4 votes.
On another note, why would a sitting United States Supreme Court justice be visiting a luxury Texas hunting lodge (or ranch) with people flying in on private jets? That seems like a prime recipe for ex-parte discussions about cases that may be facing the court. Republicans, however, may argue that since he was an appointment of Ronald Reagan, he is immune from such impunity.
Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts
Monday, February 15, 2016
Thursday, January 14, 2016
America's First Prime Minister?
Donald Trump is right about Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX). (I also asked this question some time before.)
Senator Cruz is a natural born citizen of Canada...not the United States. While his mother was born in the United States, his father was born in Cuba. He asserts that his mother is enough to cover the "natural born" citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution. I think the Constitution is rather clear on this issue. It would be up to the Supreme Court of the United States to finalize the position.
In 2008, the United States Senate, however, passed a resolution to give Senator John McCain (R-AZ) the status of natural born citizen, since he was born outside the United States, while his father was on active military service in Panama. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) stated that the Senate would not consider a similar resolution for Ted Cruz.
What's that all aboot, eh?
Senator Cruz is a natural born citizen of Canada...not the United States. While his mother was born in the United States, his father was born in Cuba. He asserts that his mother is enough to cover the "natural born" citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution. I think the Constitution is rather clear on this issue. It would be up to the Supreme Court of the United States to finalize the position.
In 2008, the United States Senate, however, passed a resolution to give Senator John McCain (R-AZ) the status of natural born citizen, since he was born outside the United States, while his father was on active military service in Panama. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) stated that the Senate would not consider a similar resolution for Ted Cruz.
What's that all aboot, eh?
Sunday, March 22, 2015
Our First Canadian President, eh?
In February, 2014, I published my thoughts on Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) running for president.
It would seem that Senator Cruz is going to announce his candidacy for the nation's highest office in the near future, despite constitutional reservations about his ability to serve.
Unlike Barack Obama, Cruz has a Canadian birth certificate. His father was a Castro-sympathizing Cuban, while his mother is his only birth connection to the United States, since she was born in Delaware.
How can Republicans not criticize Cruz legitimately for the very thing they illegitimately criticized Obama for in 2008 and 2012? Will Donald Trump parade Cruz's Canadian birth certificate for the whole world to see? Will Cruz publish his birth certificate? Will he acknowledge his Canadian roots at all?
I have reservations about people who claim they are natural born Americans, when in fact they were born on foreign shores. That applies to John McCain (R-AZ), despite the fact his father was on active military service which led to his birth in Panama. Let me go a step further, would I have berated the issue if Barack Obama had been born in Hawaii prior to 1959? The answer is an astounding yes! Considering, Hawaii was not a state until 1959. (Obama was born in 1961.)
With that said, Obama's father was born in Kenya, while his mother was born in Kansas. (If we want to draw parallels to Cruz and Obama's American pedigrees.)
Article II, Section 1, of the United States Constitution very clearly states: "No Person except a natural born Citizen...shall be eligible to the Office of President." While it may seem ludicrous to have this conversation in the 21st century, it was an important principle for the individual holding the highest political office in the land to have no allegiance by birth, or claim thereby, to another sovereign nation.
It will fall to the United States Supreme Court to decide if that portion of the Constitution allows for naturalized citizens as well. Of course, there's the constitutional amendment option, but I doubt that will happen before 2016 (or ever).
It would seem that Senator Cruz is going to announce his candidacy for the nation's highest office in the near future, despite constitutional reservations about his ability to serve.
Unlike Barack Obama, Cruz has a Canadian birth certificate. His father was a Castro-sympathizing Cuban, while his mother is his only birth connection to the United States, since she was born in Delaware.
How can Republicans not criticize Cruz legitimately for the very thing they illegitimately criticized Obama for in 2008 and 2012? Will Donald Trump parade Cruz's Canadian birth certificate for the whole world to see? Will Cruz publish his birth certificate? Will he acknowledge his Canadian roots at all?
I have reservations about people who claim they are natural born Americans, when in fact they were born on foreign shores. That applies to John McCain (R-AZ), despite the fact his father was on active military service which led to his birth in Panama. Let me go a step further, would I have berated the issue if Barack Obama had been born in Hawaii prior to 1959? The answer is an astounding yes! Considering, Hawaii was not a state until 1959. (Obama was born in 1961.)
With that said, Obama's father was born in Kenya, while his mother was born in Kansas. (If we want to draw parallels to Cruz and Obama's American pedigrees.)
Article II, Section 1, of the United States Constitution very clearly states: "No Person except a natural born Citizen...shall be eligible to the Office of President." While it may seem ludicrous to have this conversation in the 21st century, it was an important principle for the individual holding the highest political office in the land to have no allegiance by birth, or claim thereby, to another sovereign nation.
It will fall to the United States Supreme Court to decide if that portion of the Constitution allows for naturalized citizens as well. Of course, there's the constitutional amendment option, but I doubt that will happen before 2016 (or ever).
Sunday, July 06, 2014
Let's sue the President
Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner (pronounced "boner") has announced a plan to ask the United States House of Representatives to file a lawsuit against the President, which would require him to enforce, protect, and defend the Constitution.
Isn't that a noble concept?
Just days after the Fourth of July, such an action would be suggested against the Executive Branch. I find this idea ludicrous at best. How can a house of Congress sue the President to perform his duties? I think in a counter-suit, the President would sue the House of Representatives to conduct itself, through a constitutional manner, to create laws, rather than sit on its collective thumb and do nothing.
Perhaps, the only legal remedy available to the Speaker is found in Article II, Section 4, of the United States Constitution, which allows the House of Representatives to lay charges of impeachment against the President for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
Accordingly, can the House of Representatives lay a charge for impeachment against the President for enacting executive orders, which is at the heart of this squabble? The President is the head of the Executive Branch of government, which contains many, many organs (yes, I'll use an old communist term here) that allow it to operate. The President has constitutional power to execute the laws of the United States, through the enactment of executive orders. (No, there is no clause that allows for executive orders in the Constitution itself. Executive orders are implied rather than explicit.) For example, President Obama issued an executive order raising the federal minimum wage for its employees. Seemingly that is within the purview of the President, since the executive order only impacts those organs--or parts--that are within the executive's sphere of influence (a Cold War reference, yes). Does such an order maintain that the states must now raise their minimum wage?
No.
Does that mean Hobby Lobby must now raise its minimum wage to offset the cost of birth control pills and Plan B for its female employees?
No. (It's in the Bible! No, don't look it up.)
So, who can help in such a quagmire?
Let's look to the Judicial Branch, through the Constitution's well-crafted plan of Checks-and-Balances. Outside of impeachment, the only remedy for Speaker Boehner's complain can be found in the courts; however, which court has original jurisdiction over such a suit? Will the Speaker, along with a throng of Republicans, file suit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia? Or like Bush v. Gore (2000), will the case go directly to the Supreme Court of the United States for adjudication?
When it's all said and done (if it ever gains traction), I believe that the courts will find that the only recourse for action in such a case is within Article II, Section 4, of the Constitution of the United States. Previously, the Supreme Court of the United States has determined that the language of the Constitution is quite sufficient and clear in such a case. Inasmuch, Nixon v. USA (1993), the Supreme Court found that it has no judicial review of impeachment proceedings or outcomes, as such proceedings are the "sole" charge of Congress.
In other words, draft articles of impeachment, or hush!
Isn't that a noble concept?
Just days after the Fourth of July, such an action would be suggested against the Executive Branch. I find this idea ludicrous at best. How can a house of Congress sue the President to perform his duties? I think in a counter-suit, the President would sue the House of Representatives to conduct itself, through a constitutional manner, to create laws, rather than sit on its collective thumb and do nothing.
Perhaps, the only legal remedy available to the Speaker is found in Article II, Section 4, of the United States Constitution, which allows the House of Representatives to lay charges of impeachment against the President for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
Accordingly, can the House of Representatives lay a charge for impeachment against the President for enacting executive orders, which is at the heart of this squabble? The President is the head of the Executive Branch of government, which contains many, many organs (yes, I'll use an old communist term here) that allow it to operate. The President has constitutional power to execute the laws of the United States, through the enactment of executive orders. (No, there is no clause that allows for executive orders in the Constitution itself. Executive orders are implied rather than explicit.) For example, President Obama issued an executive order raising the federal minimum wage for its employees. Seemingly that is within the purview of the President, since the executive order only impacts those organs--or parts--that are within the executive's sphere of influence (a Cold War reference, yes). Does such an order maintain that the states must now raise their minimum wage?
No.
Does that mean Hobby Lobby must now raise its minimum wage to offset the cost of birth control pills and Plan B for its female employees?
No. (It's in the Bible! No, don't look it up.)
So, who can help in such a quagmire?
Let's look to the Judicial Branch, through the Constitution's well-crafted plan of Checks-and-Balances. Outside of impeachment, the only remedy for Speaker Boehner's complain can be found in the courts; however, which court has original jurisdiction over such a suit? Will the Speaker, along with a throng of Republicans, file suit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia? Or like Bush v. Gore (2000), will the case go directly to the Supreme Court of the United States for adjudication?
When it's all said and done (if it ever gains traction), I believe that the courts will find that the only recourse for action in such a case is within Article II, Section 4, of the Constitution of the United States. Previously, the Supreme Court of the United States has determined that the language of the Constitution is quite sufficient and clear in such a case. Inasmuch, Nixon v. USA (1993), the Supreme Court found that it has no judicial review of impeachment proceedings or outcomes, as such proceedings are the "sole" charge of Congress.
In other words, draft articles of impeachment, or hush!
Monday, September 30, 2013
Let's Shut It Down
Shut 'er down, boys! She's had enough.
I think it's about time for the government to shut down for a while. It's worked so hard for the good of the American people over the last many long years.
The only thing is it is driving down my stocks!
I think it's about time for the government to shut down for a while. It's worked so hard for the good of the American people over the last many long years.
The only thing is it is driving down my stocks!
Sunday, January 13, 2013
Trillion Dollar Coin
The recent uproar over the "trillion dollar coin" has brought up some economic questions for me, as a person and teacher.
My students have asked me in the past how come we can't just print more money and let people have it to spend how they see fit. It sounds like a stupid idea, on the surface, but it would seem that our government might be willing to do it.
My go to response is that money has to have a guarantee of its worth. I suppose since we know longer use a gold standard, it is merely the word of the Federal Reserve that the money is good for whatever its face-value may be.
In essence, I suppose a platinum trillion dollar coin is a solution...from a child's perspective. If the government can do that, why not simply strike a $17,000,000,000,000 coin and pay off the national debt with a brand new surplus in the Treasury?
We really can have our cake and eat it too!
My students have asked me in the past how come we can't just print more money and let people have it to spend how they see fit. It sounds like a stupid idea, on the surface, but it would seem that our government might be willing to do it.
My go to response is that money has to have a guarantee of its worth. I suppose since we know longer use a gold standard, it is merely the word of the Federal Reserve that the money is good for whatever its face-value may be.
In essence, I suppose a platinum trillion dollar coin is a solution...from a child's perspective. If the government can do that, why not simply strike a $17,000,000,000,000 coin and pay off the national debt with a brand new surplus in the Treasury?
We really can have our cake and eat it too!
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Newtown Tragedy vs. NRA $$
As the memories of the children who died last Friday in the horrific Connecticut elementary school shooting begin to fade from national attention, the media is settings its sights on the legacy of the killer and the fate of semi-automatic weapons.
Much like the fabled second coming of Jesus Christ, we await "major news" from the NRA. I will wait starry-eyed, with goose flesh the size of Bordeaux grapes, and baited-breath for the glorious revelations of the NRA! (I am surely green with envy as I write.)
I'm positive that many politicians will be checking their re-election coffers twice this holiday season to see just how much extra treasure the NRA has put in their stocking.
After all, it's not guns that kill en masse; it's deranged lunatics with semi-automatic weapons who do.
I feel like the NRA may be working on a plan to resurrect Charlton Heston for a new pro-gun ad campaign.
Much like the fabled second coming of Jesus Christ, we await "major news" from the NRA. I will wait starry-eyed, with goose flesh the size of Bordeaux grapes, and baited-breath for the glorious revelations of the NRA! (I am surely green with envy as I write.)
I'm positive that many politicians will be checking their re-election coffers twice this holiday season to see just how much extra treasure the NRA has put in their stocking.
After all, it's not guns that kill en masse; it's deranged lunatics with semi-automatic weapons who do.
I feel like the NRA may be working on a plan to resurrect Charlton Heston for a new pro-gun ad campaign.
Sunday, September 23, 2012
Rebirth of the Ottoman Empire
It's hard to know when Republicans are being literal or figurative. Case in point: Congressman Louie Gohmert (TX).
After thanking "Barack Hussein Obama," who's Muslimhood is between him and God, Congressman Gohmert goes on to criticize President Obama (and President Clinton...where does President Dubya Bush fit into this sordid equation?) for helping to restore a second-coming of the Ottoman Empire.
Is he for real?
According to him, all of the President's failed Middle East policies are going to create a lot of problems for Israel. I wonder if Gohmert's new Turkey will look back to the issue of its last caliph, Abdulmecid II, for leadership?
Like most Republicans, he didn't get into specifics on how this imminent threat to world peace was going to play out.
Shocking!
Mind you, of course, this all took place on the floor of the United States House of Representatives.
After thanking "Barack Hussein Obama," who's Muslimhood is between him and God, Congressman Gohmert goes on to criticize President Obama (and President Clinton...where does President Dubya Bush fit into this sordid equation?) for helping to restore a second-coming of the Ottoman Empire.
Is he for real?
According to him, all of the President's failed Middle East policies are going to create a lot of problems for Israel. I wonder if Gohmert's new Turkey will look back to the issue of its last caliph, Abdulmecid II, for leadership?
Like most Republicans, he didn't get into specifics on how this imminent threat to world peace was going to play out.
Shocking!
Mind you, of course, this all took place on the floor of the United States House of Representatives.
Monday, August 20, 2012
Pregnancy=No Rape
I tell people that I learn something new everyday. Yesterday was no exception to that rule. According to a member of the United States Congress, Todd Akin (R-MO), pregnancy does not occur when legitimate rape has been committed. I suppose that the female body has a way of warding off the sperm of a rapist. But, if you say it's rape, and you get pregnant, then it's not really rape.
Representative Akin sounds like a real piece of work. The sad thing (other than he is an elected official) is that he is running for the Senate this fall. What's interesting now is that Republican leaders are attempting to get Akin to withdraw from the race. These leaders include Kentucky's own bigot, Mitch McConnell, who is the Minority Leader in the Senate.
The more you know!
Representative Akin sounds like a real piece of work. The sad thing (other than he is an elected official) is that he is running for the Senate this fall. What's interesting now is that Republican leaders are attempting to get Akin to withdraw from the race. These leaders include Kentucky's own bigot, Mitch McConnell, who is the Minority Leader in the Senate.
The more you know!
Thursday, September 01, 2011
Time for Some Balls?
House Speaker John "Cries a Lot" Boehner (R-OH) recently rejected a presidential request to a Joint Session of Congress to address the creation of new jobs. Boehner requested that the address be postponed for a day, as to allow for adequate "security measures" in the House chamber of Congress. It just so happens, of course, Republican presidential candidates are set to debate that same night.
Hmmmm....sounds a bit fishy to me.
If it were me (as president), I'd bust some balls of my own. Sure, the House of Representatives may reject me, but that wouldn't deter me from making my speech on my own terms. Who needs to the House of Representatives anyhow to do it? Personally, since the Senate is Democratic-controlled, I'd go to the Senate chamber and make my speech to the nation. Unprecedented? Of course. But so is denying the President's request for a Joint Session of Congress. As a matter of courtesy, I would invite members of the House to the Senate, if they felt so inclined. Boehner: non persona gratis.
As you may have already guessed, President Obama acquiesced to the demands of Speaker Boehner and rescheduled HIS speech. I suppose Republicans can add this to their "win" category. When is the President of the United States going to realize that his political party controls the executive branch and a house of Congress? It's time to put House Republicans in their place and truly get on with the business of America. If you really think about it, how is the President going to get House Republicans to join him on his jobs initiative if he can't even get them to allow him to make a simple speech?
Duh!
Hmmmm....sounds a bit fishy to me.
If it were me (as president), I'd bust some balls of my own. Sure, the House of Representatives may reject me, but that wouldn't deter me from making my speech on my own terms. Who needs to the House of Representatives anyhow to do it? Personally, since the Senate is Democratic-controlled, I'd go to the Senate chamber and make my speech to the nation. Unprecedented? Of course. But so is denying the President's request for a Joint Session of Congress. As a matter of courtesy, I would invite members of the House to the Senate, if they felt so inclined. Boehner: non persona gratis.
As you may have already guessed, President Obama acquiesced to the demands of Speaker Boehner and rescheduled HIS speech. I suppose Republicans can add this to their "win" category. When is the President of the United States going to realize that his political party controls the executive branch and a house of Congress? It's time to put House Republicans in their place and truly get on with the business of America. If you really think about it, how is the President going to get House Republicans to join him on his jobs initiative if he can't even get them to allow him to make a simple speech?
Duh!
Sunday, August 07, 2011
S&P: AAA
Congratulations to the United States government for getting downgraded from AAA credit status to AA+. While AA+ seems pretty impressive, it puts the United States below its Western European allies, such as the United Kingdom, France and Germany, in terms of debt repayment, etc.
Tomorrow, when the world markets open up, I'm sure we will see a crash. I want to thank members of the Tea Party, and the Republican Party, in general, for its contribution to the downgrade. The eleventh-hour deal did little to salvage the nation's economy.
The country's economy is still stagnant (just look at unemployment figures and small business growth over the last six months). Like I've said numerous times, it is time to end the wars and return that money to the Treasury where it belongs. We will spend the next decade recovering from the George W. Bush years in the White House; it's better to get started now rather than wait. After all, China has threatened to cut-up America's credit card over the downgrade!
Tomorrow, when the world markets open up, I'm sure we will see a crash. I want to thank members of the Tea Party, and the Republican Party, in general, for its contribution to the downgrade. The eleventh-hour deal did little to salvage the nation's economy.
The country's economy is still stagnant (just look at unemployment figures and small business growth over the last six months). Like I've said numerous times, it is time to end the wars and return that money to the Treasury where it belongs. We will spend the next decade recovering from the George W. Bush years in the White House; it's better to get started now rather than wait. After all, China has threatened to cut-up America's credit card over the downgrade!
Friday, July 29, 2011
Did Boehner Cry?
It's time for the President to invoke the Republican staple, the George W. Bush clause, as a measure to deal with the debt ceiling crisis. He has to raise the debt limit without congressional approval. George W. Bush didn't need the approval of Congress for 95% of the things he did, so why should Obama? He can't let something as tedious as the United States Constitution get in his way.
No sir!
No sir!
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Roman Empire
As politicians in Washington use the debt ceiling as political leverage, I am reminded of the end days of the Western Roman Empire.
Rome, at its height, was the greatest civilization to ever exist. It was truly the beacon, sitting on seven hills along the Tiber River, for the whole world to gape in awe. Many of its citizens lived unparalleled lives of posh and hedonism, while few of them had any care or knowledge of the pain and suffering of the other world that existed beyond their vast borders.
Years of the good life had taken a toll on the Roman Empire's ability to function as it once did. Years of war, political greed and corruption, out of control spending, and utter neglect, had brought what some called "The Great Whore" to her knees, and eventually to a mouthful of dust as she collapsed, losing life--finally to die at the hands of the very barbarians she had easily slaughtered by the thousands before her less than stellar demise.
The beacon on the hill was no more. It's people left to fend for themselves as the light fell dim--the Dark Ages.
I have heard, in the past, the United States compared to Rome. I never thought that the United States would actually come to the brink of decay it is now. Perhaps, I didn't want to believe it possible in my lifetime. Like those in Rome, I simply was unable to fathom the very destruction of my nation from within, through my very way of life.
That's a very bleak look at the state of things in this country. We have Republicans and Democrats bargaining away our future in dark rooms and corridors, far away from the light of observation of the people they so eagerly attest to serve. The United States may default on trillions of dollars of debt. The Treasury Department says we have until August 2, but I feel as if that was a rather optimistic view of things. An increase in rhetoric from the White House and Congress has led me to believe that zero hour is now upon us. The world's stock markets are taking notice of Damocles' sword hanging over the largest economic powerhouse in the world. Truly, what will happen to the world economy if the United States is unable to pay its debt? I do not think anyone really knows what will happen; it is without precedent.
America's economy is bloated. The unemployed are in the millions; however, money to the wars is free flowing and only serving to further bankrupt us, those who we once had no fear of are watching closely, as the modern-day whore swells. Their wagons are circling.
America the great, the light is dimming and your ungrateful children continue to need more.
Rome, at its height, was the greatest civilization to ever exist. It was truly the beacon, sitting on seven hills along the Tiber River, for the whole world to gape in awe. Many of its citizens lived unparalleled lives of posh and hedonism, while few of them had any care or knowledge of the pain and suffering of the other world that existed beyond their vast borders.
Years of the good life had taken a toll on the Roman Empire's ability to function as it once did. Years of war, political greed and corruption, out of control spending, and utter neglect, had brought what some called "The Great Whore" to her knees, and eventually to a mouthful of dust as she collapsed, losing life--finally to die at the hands of the very barbarians she had easily slaughtered by the thousands before her less than stellar demise.
The beacon on the hill was no more. It's people left to fend for themselves as the light fell dim--the Dark Ages.
I have heard, in the past, the United States compared to Rome. I never thought that the United States would actually come to the brink of decay it is now. Perhaps, I didn't want to believe it possible in my lifetime. Like those in Rome, I simply was unable to fathom the very destruction of my nation from within, through my very way of life.
That's a very bleak look at the state of things in this country. We have Republicans and Democrats bargaining away our future in dark rooms and corridors, far away from the light of observation of the people they so eagerly attest to serve. The United States may default on trillions of dollars of debt. The Treasury Department says we have until August 2, but I feel as if that was a rather optimistic view of things. An increase in rhetoric from the White House and Congress has led me to believe that zero hour is now upon us. The world's stock markets are taking notice of Damocles' sword hanging over the largest economic powerhouse in the world. Truly, what will happen to the world economy if the United States is unable to pay its debt? I do not think anyone really knows what will happen; it is without precedent.
America's economy is bloated. The unemployed are in the millions; however, money to the wars is free flowing and only serving to further bankrupt us, those who we once had no fear of are watching closely, as the modern-day whore swells. Their wagons are circling.
America the great, the light is dimming and your ungrateful children continue to need more.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Healthcare
See if you've heard this joke.
A man walks into a bank and hands the teller a note demanding $1 and healthcare. He waits patiently for the police to respond to the robbery and take him into custody. As a ward of the state, he is now receiving the healthcare he couldn't afford on his own.
The only thing is that this really happened. It isn't a joke. It was a reality, recently, for a 59-year-old North Carolina man. As Republicans and Democrats wage a war on the cost of national healthcare--whether you want to call it "Obamacare" or "Obamneycare"--there are people who cannot afford to receive life saving health care. They can't afford medications, medical procedures, or long-term life extending care, whether in public or private facilities.
Our country has the money and medical resources to guarantee each American top-notch medical care for those who cannot afford it through no fault of their own, whether or not they are homeless, laid off from work, injured, and the list can continue.
As American taxpayers foot the bill for two wars, which cost ten-of-billions of dollars annually, we allow our own citizens to suffer and die needlessly. Besides these two wars, we are set to fight another one in Libya. It's time for President Obama to live up to his promise of ending the Bush wars. Thus, bringing home those billions of dollars dumped into a bottomless blackhole located on the other side of the globe. There is no hope that these wars will ever end satisfactorily. My suggestion is to stop Libya before it begins in earnestness. It's not our fight. We weren't there when it began in 1969, why do we insist on being there at the end in 2011? Yes, innocent people are dying there, but the same is true about the United States. In the final analysis, who deserves our money most?
A man walks into a bank and hands the teller a note demanding $1 and healthcare. He waits patiently for the police to respond to the robbery and take him into custody. As a ward of the state, he is now receiving the healthcare he couldn't afford on his own.
The only thing is that this really happened. It isn't a joke. It was a reality, recently, for a 59-year-old North Carolina man. As Republicans and Democrats wage a war on the cost of national healthcare--whether you want to call it "Obamacare" or "Obamneycare"--there are people who cannot afford to receive life saving health care. They can't afford medications, medical procedures, or long-term life extending care, whether in public or private facilities.
Our country has the money and medical resources to guarantee each American top-notch medical care for those who cannot afford it through no fault of their own, whether or not they are homeless, laid off from work, injured, and the list can continue.
As American taxpayers foot the bill for two wars, which cost ten-of-billions of dollars annually, we allow our own citizens to suffer and die needlessly. Besides these two wars, we are set to fight another one in Libya. It's time for President Obama to live up to his promise of ending the Bush wars. Thus, bringing home those billions of dollars dumped into a bottomless blackhole located on the other side of the globe. There is no hope that these wars will ever end satisfactorily. My suggestion is to stop Libya before it begins in earnestness. It's not our fight. We weren't there when it began in 1969, why do we insist on being there at the end in 2011? Yes, innocent people are dying there, but the same is true about the United States. In the final analysis, who deserves our money most?
Monday, June 13, 2011
Weinergate
Who wants to see the pics that Congressman Anthony Weiner tweeted to me? Not to mention the inappropriate banter he forced me to read!
Oh Lordy! When will these politicians learn?
Oh Lordy! When will these politicians learn?
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Republican House
I thought the past was the past. I was wrong, so it would seem. Republicans in the House of Representative want to rehash the past by attempting to overturn what they have to endearingly called "Obamacare."
Do Republicans really think they have a chance? Sure, they have the majority in the House, but they don't have a prayer in the Democratic-controlled Senate, nor with the President.
So why waste time?
Do Republicans really think they have a chance? Sure, they have the majority in the House, but they don't have a prayer in the Democratic-controlled Senate, nor with the President.
So why waste time?
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Gates tells troops "don't ask, don't tell" is still in effect
Mr. Secretary, the last time I checked our country is not a military dictatorship. The Constitution gives Congress the power to make laws and the president the power to enforce them. It does not say anything about gaining the approval of the military before a law can be enacted.
No, I haven't read the law. Yes, there probably is a clause in the law that provides for the military (i.e., Pentagon) to phase in the changes over a period of time. The Secretary of Defense, however, is behaving as if he is the little dictator. I'm surprised he didn't shake his fists into the air during his news conference.
Get over yourself.
No, I haven't read the law. Yes, there probably is a clause in the law that provides for the military (i.e., Pentagon) to phase in the changes over a period of time. The Secretary of Defense, however, is behaving as if he is the little dictator. I'm surprised he didn't shake his fists into the air during his news conference.
Get over yourself.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Jon Kyl is a bigot
After the Senate voted to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) declared the repealing of the law would "cost lives."
I wonder exactly how being homosexual would cost heterosexuals their lives. Is that what he meant? He went further to qualify his comments by saying the discrimination found in "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was not characteristic of the racial integration of the armed forces over fifty years ago. His attitude was that all lawmakers were 100% behind racial integration of the armed forces.
Let's face it, there were lawmakers who felt that anything that brough the races together was a catastrophe waiting to happen. This is similiar to what Senator Kyl is expressing through is comments now. Senator, it is 2010, not 1960! I wonder if fifty years from now, someone will look back and wonder how anyone could say such comments about a group of people? You would never hear a lawmaker today say that the racial integration of yesteryear was a bad policy. The same will be said about allowing gays to serve openly in the United States military.
I wonder exactly how being homosexual would cost heterosexuals their lives. Is that what he meant? He went further to qualify his comments by saying the discrimination found in "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was not characteristic of the racial integration of the armed forces over fifty years ago. His attitude was that all lawmakers were 100% behind racial integration of the armed forces.
Let's face it, there were lawmakers who felt that anything that brough the races together was a catastrophe waiting to happen. This is similiar to what Senator Kyl is expressing through is comments now. Senator, it is 2010, not 1960! I wonder if fifty years from now, someone will look back and wonder how anyone could say such comments about a group of people? You would never hear a lawmaker today say that the racial integration of yesteryear was a bad policy. The same will be said about allowing gays to serve openly in the United States military.
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Don't Ask, Don't Tell
With a vote by the United States Senate, which followed an earlier vote by the House, Congress has repealed another area of discrimination, which was the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy of the 1990s.
It now lacks only the President's signature to become a law.
It now lacks only the President's signature to become a law.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
John Boehner
Is it just me or does anyone else pronounce John Boehner's (R-OH), who will be the next Speaker of the House, last name as "BONER"?
I don't see how you get BAY-ner out of that. I think it is a made-up pronunciation. After all, who would want to hear the infamous words, "Hey BONER!"?
I don't see how you get BAY-ner out of that. I think it is a made-up pronunciation. After all, who would want to hear the infamous words, "Hey BONER!"?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)