Tag: United States Congress

Categories
Barack Obama Politics Terrorism United States USA PATRIOT Act

Bush’s Patriot Act Pt 2 – Boiling Frogs

As an easily distracted and soundbite sized attention span nation, we are prime fodder for what is called the “boiling frog syndrome”. ‘If you put a frog into a boiling pot of water he would quickly jump out. However a frog in a cool pot of water that is gradually heated would not perceive the danger and would slowly cook to death’.

The premise of this syndrome, that is used here metaphorically, is actually quite a clear illustration of what happens with our acceptance of inflation, the use of our taxes for things that we, in an informed state of mind, would never agree to, etc. But for this particular text the boiling frog syndrome is a clear analogy for the siege on our civil liberties and, indeed, our very constitutional rights.

In October 2001, then President George W. Bush signed into law the congressional act called the “Patriot Act”. Pretty name, it conceals any potential threat to you and I personally… see? THAT’S THE COOL WATER MR & MRS. FROG.

But lets take a closer look at this craftily labeled roll back of civil rights;

This so called Patriot Act law which we are told is a law to ‘counter terrorism’ never clearly defines exactly what is terrorism. This vague definition of terrorism leaves much open to interpretation of  ‘law enforcement agencies’ and agents who are subject to human emotion and racial and ideological influences.

The first amendment says that “Congress shall make no law abridging the right to petition the government for the redress of grievances”. Dear reader, what’s YOUR grievance with the government? On any particular day you may be considered a ‘terrorist’, a potential threat and detained indefinitely. Maybe as an immigrant some law enforcement officer or agency decides you’re a ‘threat’. Keep current on the expanded deportation laws under the so called Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act clearly violates fourth amendment rights as well, which states that “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED”. Many would say “as long as I’m safe” or ” I have nothing to hide”…those are legitimate reasonings, but be very aware that evil goes in like a needle… and spreads.

Be aware that civil rights roll backs are happening ‘in stages’… the water is getting hot…slowly. The constant bombardment of terror threats makes our disappearing civil liberties more acceptable… getting hotter. The fact that it’s Barack Obama that just signed into law a continuance of the Patriot Act makes it more palatable…and look around, it’s getting steamy–but;  “I ignored it”, “The basketball playoffs are on plus I got the new iPhone”, “I heard about that Patriot Act years ago and I knew it didn’t feel right but I was scared so I didn’t open my eyes”, “Recently I saw on the news that the Patriot Act was extended but Trump said something stupid so I forgot…”

Anybody notice how warm it is in here?

SON OF MAN

Categories
Democratic Politics Republican

The Most Raucous Town Hall Yet, Against A Republican

This town hall by Republican Representative Dan Webster is being considered by most as the most “raucous” yet, where those in attendance shouted down the freshman representative and were even scolded by the police.

A town-hall meeting held in Orlando by U.S. Rep. Dan Webster degenerated into bedlam Tuesday, with members of the crowd shouting down the freshman Republican congressman and yelling at one another.

It could be a sign of things to come for Webster, a staunch conservative in a competitive district that Democrats hope to recapture in 2012. Last week, Webster took heat from conservative tea party members for not pushing hard enough to cut the federal budget.

But Tuesday, the heat came from the other side.

The event was the last of a series of town-hall meetings Webster has held during Congress’ spring recess, which ends Monday. While the others were civil and largely uneventful, the 300 people at Tuesday’s meeting were so raucous they were scolded by a police officer to act “like grown people.”

2012 can’t get here fast enough.

Categories
Barack Obama Domestic Policies Medicare Paul Ryan Republican Tax Tax cut United States voters

Paul Ryan Can’t Explain His Trickle Down Economics To The Voters

Republican Paul Ryan is able to go on television and proclaim the myth that taking money from seniors and giving it to billionaires in the form of a Tax cut is the way to get America back on the economic track. On television, with the media bought and paid for by some of these same billionaires, Ryan is never questioned about exactly how is this concept supposed to work. But at home, the people of his state knows better.

In a town hall meeting, with the very same voters that put Mr. Ryan into office, questions were asked about his budget plan for which Ryan had no favorable answers. Among other things, Ryan’s plan would give seniors an $8000.00 check to be put towards purchasing their own health care from the private market.

See for yourself!

Categories
Barack Obama Democratic Politics Republican United States

New Poll Finds Americans Have Soured On The Republicans

Call it buyer’s remorse, a recall on faulty merchandise. Or call it a demand for a refund due to false advertising. Whatever you call it, Americans are beginning to see that this batch of Republicans in Congress are not what they had bargained for.

A new PPP poll finds that just a few months after handing the control of the House of Representatives  over to the Republican party, 43% think John Boehner and company are doing a worse job than Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats did when they were in charge.

The poll finds that even among Independents, Republicans have lost support;

Independents say by a 44-30 margin that Republicans have been doing worse.  Further, 48% trust President Obama more to lead the country in the right direction, while 42% have more faith in the GOP.  The sentiment with independents is 49-37 for Obama.

And when it comes to the question of who is  the most  extreme, Americans point the finger directly to the Republicans as the nut-jobs;

Americans also see the Democratic Party as being more mainstream (46%) than extremist (39%).  Their opinion of the GOP is almost the opposite: 40% see that party as mainstream, and 48% as extremist.  Independents say by a 49-33 margin that the GOP is extremist and by a 49-36 margin that the Democrats are mainstream

Based on these findings, Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling expressed his opinion on the Democrats chances in the next election;

“The conventional wisdom is that Democrats will have a very hard time winning back control of the House next year, but that may be wrong- voters have soured on the new Republican majority in record time.

Soured is not the word. Is there some way we can pack this group of Republicans up and ship them off to a country more suitable for them? Like Somalia?

Categories
Barack Obama Featured

No Specifics, But Hate Group Demands President Be Impeached

In the same style that has become the norm with today’s Republican party,–and that is the lack of specifics in any claim they make– a right winged group called Liberty Counsel is actively pushing for the impeachment or removal from office of President Obama. The group has been sending out emails to this effect, the latest which states;

[T]here is an unchecked arrogance, even a condescending, elitist mindset evident in the Obama White House. The President behaves as though he is somehow above the law!

This Administration seems to believe that the Constitution is pliable and subject to political expedience. They act  as though their insights are greater than our Founding Fathers and the statesmen who gave shape and content to the Constitution!

The Obama Administration presumes it is “bigger” than the presidency.

No man is bigger than the office he is elected to hold. Through carefully crafted checks and balances, our Founders made sure that no office holder would be more “empowered” than the Constitution allowed.

Barack Obama’s subversion of our Constitution must be stopped! Those colluding with him in Congress, the Administration, the federal bureaucracy, State offices, and any other position of public trust must also be held accountable.

Liberty Counsel is continuing to demand that elected officials (all of them!) live up to their Oaths of Office – or be FIRED, RECALLED, or IMPEACHED.

Again, words. Just words with no specifics. Anyone can say anything, but without facts of specifics, there’s nothing to act on…nothing.

Adapting the same mindset, one can use the same words above to indicate that Liberty Counsel is against the Constitution and should be shut down, like so…;

[T]here is an unchecked arrogance, even a condescending, elitist mindset evident in the Liberty Counsel Group. These right-winged Nut Jobs behave as though they are somehow above the law!

This Group seems to believe that the Constitution is pliable and subject to political expedience. They act  as though their insights are greater than our Founding Fathers and the statesmen who gave shape and content to the Constitution!

Liberty Counsel presumes  Rush The Nut Limbaugh is “bigger” than the presidency!

No Group is bigger than the Constitution. Through carefully crafted checks and balances, our Founders made sure that no nut jobs or their affiliated nut jobs, would be more “empowered” than the Constitution allowed.

Liberty Counsel’s subversion of our Constitution must be stopped! Those colluding with them must also be held accountable including  Republicans,The Tea Party,the Koch Brother’s etc..,

Americans are continuing to demand that Liberty Counsel (all of them!) live up to the truth – or be FIRED, SHUTDOWN, or INJECTED WITH SOME TRUTH SYNDROME TO DISCOVER WHO THEY’RE IN COLLUSION WITH.

See? It works both ways.

Categories
Featured New York Republican

Republican Muscle-Man and His Red Phone on Craigslist

Republican Congressman Christopher Lee

A Republican congressman, Christopher Lee quit his job today. Seems the congressman had a nice camera phone, you know, the kind that was capable of taking pictures of the congressman as he posed in front a mirror half naked. And apparently its  the kind of phone capable of sending said  pictures directly online, as in this case, sharing them on Craigslist

We’re not sure what phone was used, but from the looks of the congressman’s reflection, he’s holding a red phone, probably a blackberry or something by AT&T. Whoever it is though, some phone company is in for some free advertising. Way to go congressman!

Oh, and for a little comic relief, here’s what the Congressman had to say before stepping down;

“The challenges we face in Western New York and across the country are too serious for me to allow this distraction to continue, and so I am announcing that I have resigned my seat in Congress effective immediately,” Lee said in a written statement. “I regret the harm that my actions have caused my family, my staff and my constituents. I deeply and sincerely apologize to them all. I have made profound mistakes and I promise to work as hard as I can to seek their forgiveness.”

Explaining to his wife why he posed and took these pictures, then uploaded them to the “Women Seeking Men” section of Craigslist is one thing. Explaining why he described himself as a “divorced” “lobbyist” and a “fit fun classy guy” is another. What I’m interested in however, is how he’s gonna react when she takes his little red phone away!

Now that’s gonna be the real story…

Categories
Featured Health insurance New York Repeal United States

Congresswoman Votes for Repeal, But Didn’t Know Who Pays Her Health Care

Apparently, not all Republicans in Congress who voted to repeal the Obama Care Health Law know that their Health Care is paid for by the Government. That appeared to be the case with Congresswoman Ann Marie Buerkle, Republican Representative from New York.

The freshman Congresswoman held her first town hall meeting in Newark NY, and had to be told by a staff member that her Health care is paid for by tax payers. Reporting the story is Marnie Eisenstadt:

“Buerkle, who voted to repeal the health care reform act, was twice asked about the health insurance she receives as a government employee. At first she said she couldn’t understand why people were so interested in her health insurance, and that taxpayers didn’t pay anything for it. She later corrected herself after being handed a note from a staffer. Like most employees, she pays for a portion of her insurance and her employer, the government, pays the rest, she said.”

Seems to me that the wrong person got elected here. Can we hold another election and get her staffer instead?

Categories
Politics United States

What Americans Want From The 112th Congress This Year

According to a new Gallup Poll, a whopping 83% of Americans want Congress to do something about an energy bill favoring clean energy or alternative energy. This same poll also finds that 76% of Americans want the tax system overhauled, and 72% want a speedy withdrawal from Afghanistan.

See more from Gallup

Categories
Healthcare United States

Is The Individual Mandate Constitutional? Its Creator Says…

In a recent interview conducted by Ezra Klein of the Washington Post, with one of the original authors of the individual mandate – the piece of language in the health care reform bill that requires Americans to purchase health insurance, but is attacked by Republicans as “unconstitutional,” – was asked if the constitutionality of the mandate was ever questioned back in 1991 when the term was first used.

Mr. Mark Pauly, who was the lead author of a Health Affairs paper, was given the job to come up with a way to persuade President George H.W. Bush to adopt a health care policy where all Americans will be covered, while keeping the private health care providers in charge of the industry. The individual mandate was seen as the only way to accomplish this feat.

The question was asked by Mr. Klein; “Was the constitutionality of the provision a question, either in your deliberations or after it was released?” Mr. Pauly answered;

“I don’t remember that being raised at all. The way it was viewed by the Congressional Budget Office in 1994 was, effectively, as a tax. You either paid the tax and got insurance that way or went and got it another way. So I’ve been surprised at that argument. But I’m not an expert on the Constitution. My fix would be to simply say raise everyone’s taxes by what a health insurance policy would cost — Congress definitely has the power to do that — and then tell people that if they obtain insurance, they’ll get a tax break of the same amount. So instead of a penalty, it’s a perfectly legal tax break. But this seems to me to angelic pinhead density arguments about whether it’s a payment to do something or not to do something.”

Opponents of the law, which they have affectionately dubbed ‘ObamaCare,’ states that the law violates the Commerce Clause in the constitution, which, according to Article 1 Section 8 Clause 3 states that Congress shall have the power to: “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes”. This its opponents claim, does not give congress the power to mandate commerce, or to make anyone buy insurance, thus, its unconstitutionality.

Proponents claim that the power given to Congress through the Commerce Clause of the Constitution is a grant of power, not an express limitation on the power of Congress to regulate the economy, thus, the law is giving Congress the power to improve the economy through the individual mandate and is therefore constitutional.

This ongoing debate prompted the next question from Mr. Klein, “…whether the individual mandate is a penalty for economic inactivity or whether it’s part of a broader system of regulations affecting a market for health care that we’re all participating in.” Mr. Pauly answered;

I see it in the latter way. We thought it was a good idea to do everything possible to encourage people to get insurance. Subsidies will probably pick up the great bulk of the population. But the point of the mandate was that there are a few Evil Knievals who won’t buy it and this would bring them into the system. In our version, the penalty was effectively equal to the premium of a policy. You paid the penalty and you got the insurance. That’s one of my puzzlements here: In the new law, the actual level of the penalty is quite small compared to the price of a policy. It’s only about 20 percent of the cost of a policy

In short, at the time this ‘individual mandate’ was implemented and presented to a Republican president, the common wisdom was that it would keep the government out of the healthcare sector. Requiring people to buy healthcare as the mandate did back in the early nineties, insured a larger portion of Americans and eliminated the need for a single payer government run option.

Because the private sector would benefit from the increased policies sales the individual mandate provided, Republicans signed on to the measure. Democrats on the other hand did not approve of the measure.

So why  now the debate on the constitutionality of the individual mandate coming from the right?  Simply put, there is now a Democratic President in the White House, and although he and other Democrats have now seen the need for the individual mandate as a way to allow the private sector to offer health care to all, Republicans now have a change of heart. So the debate, childish as it is, continues…

See the full interview here.

Exit mobile version