The Congressional Republicans handed President Barack Hussein Obama a crucial victory in "fighting" for the middle class by agreeing to continue the payroll tax cut so the average American can have an additional $40 a week in their paycheck.
Really??? Congressional Republicans caved on principals to give the average American $40 more per week?
Think about this REAL hard - was does $40 buy the average American?
You can't fill your gas tank with $40.
You can't feed a family of four for a week with $40.
You surely couldn't send your son or daughter (illegal or legal) to community college for $40 a week.
You can't buy a new home, a new car, a new business, and new anything for $40 a week. So what were Republicans fighting for?
They were fighting to not be cornered by a brilliant campaigner in Mr. Obama.
DID CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS MISS THE POINT HERE?
Shouldn't they have been fighting for $400 a week, or more? It's doable if they had the fortitude to do what they said they were going to do when they ran for office - shrink the size of government.
The statistics in this argument were twisted by the Obama Press Corps and supported by Republicans. $40 for the AVERAGE American is $40 for who? It's not ALL Americans. It's for a class of people that we have been repeatedly told is shrinking, the Middle Class. And it's shrinking because of the greed of the 1% we're told. I agree.
The 1% in my world is that millionaire elected and appointed "public" officials in Washington DC, who by the way, were not wealthy BEFORE getting into politics(?).
What you should be upset about and willing to fight against is that the arrogant bastards that think throwing you and me a crumb of $40 per week (which is most likely closer to $5 per week) will continue to kill us, financially until we want to become Government dependants like their constituents.
The Obama Press Corps has force fed the Congressional Republicans the virtue of letting the little people have some of their money back.
Now is the time to act on this issue because it will be up for debate in two months. Don't allow Washington tell us how much money we can be "allowed" to have back temporarily.
Semper Fi!
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Circular Firing Squad
The Iowa caucuses are less than a month away and Republicans are doing their best to play into the Liberal Media's hands by attacking each other. While Iowa may be the beginning, it certainly is not the end of the Republican Primary process. Neither is New Hampshire or South Carolina. But all I read about is if Mitt doesn't win New Hampshire it's 2008 all over again. If Newt doesn't win South Carolina he can't carry the South in a general election, etc, etc, etc.
The issue, is NOT the differences between the Republican candidates rather, the fact that they have played by the rules of the Liberal media in criticizing their rivals. Let's look at the election this way:
If you could only vote for the following people in the general election, who would you vote for? Put a check mark next to whoever you would vote for come November:
Ron Paul ______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Michell Bachman _______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Jon Huntsman _______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Rick Perry ______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Mitt Romney ______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Newt Gingrich ______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Herman Cain ______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
If you did not place a check mark in any of the races for the Socialist on the right side of the ballot, then you understand what is important in this election. Any one of the Republican candidates is a far better choice than what we have in the office of the President today.
So, rather than kill individual candidates because of ones policy decisions, marriage issues, foreign policy stance, or whatever, keep the focus on the failed policies of the Obama administration and the road of destruction that the Liberal Democrat party has driven our country down, and why a Republican President will save this country from an impending disaster.
Instead of letting the Liberal media tell us which of our candidates is not electable and why, why don't we tell the country why any one of them is the correct choice come November? The diversity amongst our candidates should be celebrated, not condemned.
Don't let the Liberal media choose the Republican nominee for President, that's OUR privilege!
The issue, is NOT the differences between the Republican candidates rather, the fact that they have played by the rules of the Liberal media in criticizing their rivals. Let's look at the election this way:
If you could only vote for the following people in the general election, who would you vote for? Put a check mark next to whoever you would vote for come November:
Ron Paul ______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Michell Bachman _______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Jon Huntsman _______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Rick Perry ______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Mitt Romney ______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Newt Gingrich ______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
Herman Cain ______ vs Barack Hussein Obama ______
If you did not place a check mark in any of the races for the Socialist on the right side of the ballot, then you understand what is important in this election. Any one of the Republican candidates is a far better choice than what we have in the office of the President today.
So, rather than kill individual candidates because of ones policy decisions, marriage issues, foreign policy stance, or whatever, keep the focus on the failed policies of the Obama administration and the road of destruction that the Liberal Democrat party has driven our country down, and why a Republican President will save this country from an impending disaster.
Instead of letting the Liberal media tell us which of our candidates is not electable and why, why don't we tell the country why any one of them is the correct choice come November? The diversity amongst our candidates should be celebrated, not condemned.
Don't let the Liberal media choose the Republican nominee for President, that's OUR privilege!
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Tax Payers Pay!!!
Tax payer money put to good use. Be warned PG13!
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2011/12/06/quarter-billion-taxpayer-dollars-spent-penis-pumps
How come this makes me think about Congress!
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2011/12/06/quarter-billion-taxpayer-dollars-spent-penis-pumps
How come this makes me think about Congress!
Missing the Target
Who said this?
“We’ve had implosions on Wall Street,” he said, in an interview with Bloomberg News yesterday. “We had bad behavior on Wall Street. We had lack of transparency on Wall Street. I believe they are, in some measure, responsible for a diminishment in trust.”
Barack Hussein Obama? Nope.
Hillary Clinton? Nope
Elizabeth Warren? Nope
Republican Presidential candidate Jon Hunstman? Yep!
I understand the simplicity in attacking Wall Street during a tough economic time but don't agree with it. Mr. Huntsman is shooting at a target, unfortunately it's the wrong target.
The target is CONGRESS! Period!
Congress, NOT Wall Street created the Community Reinvestment Law forcing banks to make bad loans. Congress, NOT Wall Street created Fannie and Freddie to bundled BILLIONS of dollars of bad loans to sell to Wall Street who sold them to us.
Congress, NOT Wall Street has spent TRILLIONS of DOLLARS it does not have! Congress, NOT Wall Street continues to demonize hard working Americans and place targets on their backs utilizing class warfare.
Just like Elmer Fudd, Jon Huntsman needs to get an aim on the right target before he starts shooting. Congress is the target Mr. Hunstman, not Wall Street or the American worker.
Republicans need to talk about the facts and stop demagogging like Democrats.
“We’ve had implosions on Wall Street,” he said, in an interview with Bloomberg News yesterday. “We had bad behavior on Wall Street. We had lack of transparency on Wall Street. I believe they are, in some measure, responsible for a diminishment in trust.”
Barack Hussein Obama? Nope.
Hillary Clinton? Nope
Elizabeth Warren? Nope
Republican Presidential candidate Jon Hunstman? Yep!
I understand the simplicity in attacking Wall Street during a tough economic time but don't agree with it. Mr. Huntsman is shooting at a target, unfortunately it's the wrong target.
The target is CONGRESS! Period!
Congress, NOT Wall Street created the Community Reinvestment Law forcing banks to make bad loans. Congress, NOT Wall Street created Fannie and Freddie to bundled BILLIONS of dollars of bad loans to sell to Wall Street who sold them to us.
Congress, NOT Wall Street has spent TRILLIONS of DOLLARS it does not have! Congress, NOT Wall Street continues to demonize hard working Americans and place targets on their backs utilizing class warfare.
Just like Elmer Fudd, Jon Huntsman needs to get an aim on the right target before he starts shooting. Congress is the target Mr. Hunstman, not Wall Street or the American worker.
Republicans need to talk about the facts and stop demagogging like Democrats.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Barney Leaving Good for GOP?
Is Barney Frank "retiring" on the Mayan calender as part of the prediction of the end of the world? It all seems pretty eerie.
The question is this however - "is Barney Frank's retirement good for the Massachusetts GOP? All I heard yesterday was how the reign of horror is over and how this seat should now be a Republican oasis in Communistic Massachusetts.
While Mr. Frank retiring on any day is GREAT news, it certainly doesn't make this seat a sure fire MASS GOP victory. My concern isn't with who may step up to run for this seat, but rather, does the MASS GOP have the ability to help a candidate capture this open seat? Sean Bielat's run against Barney last cycle was formidable, but the next Democrat candidate will not have a Fannie/Freddie albatross hanging around his/her neck.
This week, the MASS GOP will elect a new Chairman/leader of the party. The outgoing Chair touts the grass root victories last year as those of the MASS GOP. The reality is however, that almost all of the State Party's assets and money went to the Governors race and NOT the State Rep races that MASS GOP claims as their own. The MASS GOP has had little to no affect on the local races and their claim to fame seems to be sycophants to whoever is running for Governor. Imagine how the Auditors race could have been different with a quarter of the money driven to the Governors race?
So, what will the next Chair of the MASS GOP do any differently to ensure that more State Reps and State Senators are elected? A majority or a majority blocking Republican Senate will do more good for this state than a Republican Governor with no base in the House and Senate. Why is this so obvious to almost all except those that run the State Party?
If you analyze the victory of all the new State Representatives, you will find that most, if not all, have a solid Conservative base. So why won't the MASS GOP, as the leader of the Republicans in Massachusetts, acknowledge that the lack of GOP victories over the years is a direct result of the MASS GOP moving away from a Conservative platform to a liberal platform? The answer is simple - jobs in administrations, appointed positions in Massachusetts government, and social status.
The next elected leader of the MASS GOP has to put the party first and remind people of why Republicans are Republicans. A Fiscal Conservative with Socially Moderate positions is NOT a CONSERVATIVE base. What's the difference between that position and a conservative Democrat? It would not have gotten most of our newer State Reps elected.
The choice is very clear Wednesday night, November 30th: elect a same ole, same ole MASS GOP Chair whose orders come from above and grass roots is a foreign word, or elect a Conservative who will differentiate Republicans from Democrats and give the voters of Massachusetts a clear choice next November.
Click on this link for more information and ask your State Committee Man and Women to vote to make the MASS GOP accountable for their actions and support Frank McNamara.
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/11d/MassGOP_vote/index.html
The question is this however - "is Barney Frank's retirement good for the Massachusetts GOP? All I heard yesterday was how the reign of horror is over and how this seat should now be a Republican oasis in Communistic Massachusetts.
While Mr. Frank retiring on any day is GREAT news, it certainly doesn't make this seat a sure fire MASS GOP victory. My concern isn't with who may step up to run for this seat, but rather, does the MASS GOP have the ability to help a candidate capture this open seat? Sean Bielat's run against Barney last cycle was formidable, but the next Democrat candidate will not have a Fannie/Freddie albatross hanging around his/her neck.
This week, the MASS GOP will elect a new Chairman/leader of the party. The outgoing Chair touts the grass root victories last year as those of the MASS GOP. The reality is however, that almost all of the State Party's assets and money went to the Governors race and NOT the State Rep races that MASS GOP claims as their own. The MASS GOP has had little to no affect on the local races and their claim to fame seems to be sycophants to whoever is running for Governor. Imagine how the Auditors race could have been different with a quarter of the money driven to the Governors race?
So, what will the next Chair of the MASS GOP do any differently to ensure that more State Reps and State Senators are elected? A majority or a majority blocking Republican Senate will do more good for this state than a Republican Governor with no base in the House and Senate. Why is this so obvious to almost all except those that run the State Party?
If you analyze the victory of all the new State Representatives, you will find that most, if not all, have a solid Conservative base. So why won't the MASS GOP, as the leader of the Republicans in Massachusetts, acknowledge that the lack of GOP victories over the years is a direct result of the MASS GOP moving away from a Conservative platform to a liberal platform? The answer is simple - jobs in administrations, appointed positions in Massachusetts government, and social status.
The next elected leader of the MASS GOP has to put the party first and remind people of why Republicans are Republicans. A Fiscal Conservative with Socially Moderate positions is NOT a CONSERVATIVE base. What's the difference between that position and a conservative Democrat? It would not have gotten most of our newer State Reps elected.
The choice is very clear Wednesday night, November 30th: elect a same ole, same ole MASS GOP Chair whose orders come from above and grass roots is a foreign word, or elect a Conservative who will differentiate Republicans from Democrats and give the voters of Massachusetts a clear choice next November.
Click on this link for more information and ask your State Committee Man and Women to vote to make the MASS GOP accountable for their actions and support Frank McNamara.
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/11d/MassGOP_vote/index.html
Sunday, August 21, 2011
What's the "Gamble" With Casino's?
Why won't Governor Deval Patrick and the Massachusetts Legislature come together to craft a Casino Bill that would get an up or down vote and stop this baiting of communities?
What's the gamble? While Evergreen Solar goes into bankruptcy costing the state tens of millions of dollars, we have established casino operators willing to put tens of millions of their money into building a new industry in Massachusetts. Think about that for a moment. The casino owners will spend tens of millions of dollars on construction and then gaming, in a state where jobs have not returned, our population is leaving (see 10 Congressmen) and our college graduates can't find suitable jobs based on their studies.
I don't care if you gamble or not, casinos WILL create jobs! Casinos will grow the tax base of the communities in which they are placed and the state itself. So where's the gamble?
The Governor backed Evergreen Solar as a company of the future because of it was/is in the Green Technology field. Most casinos will do what it can to make a buck including using every type of green technology to reduce its operating costs. Sounds like a company that is sort of in the green technology field. I can tell you this, everyone knew the risk with Evergreen Solar because solar power is not affordable to individuals and corporations with Government grants, and even then it's still risky. So where's the gamble.
Whether you are a supporter or opponent of Casinos, you should be irate over how the Legislature and the Governor have failed to do their jobs and get this issue on center stage so it can be debated, vetted, and voted upon. Win or lose, we the taxpayer deserve a Legislature and Governor that will overturn every rock to explore new employers who will employ us and create a ripple effect of jobs and prosperity in our communities.
So where's the gamble? I think the gamble lies with our elected officials who have taken money from lobbyists to shut this issue down, otherwise there would have been a Casino Bill voted on three years ago!
I know casinos don't work. The new construction at places like Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun casinos is all a sham. I know that the people they employ aren't real. I know that the southeastern Connecticut area would have survived even with all those layoffs from Electric Boat. They just don't work. This must be the viewpoint of every Legislator and the Governor who won't put this up for a vote.
Folks, it's time to call your State Rep, State Senator and the Governor, to demand that they act upon a casino bill and vote it before the Legislative session ends. It is far too important to let it slip away again just like the lobbyists want it to.
A job is a job, especially to someone who can't find one. Tell our elected officials to stop gambling with our economic survival and do what they are elected to do!
What's the gamble? While Evergreen Solar goes into bankruptcy costing the state tens of millions of dollars, we have established casino operators willing to put tens of millions of their money into building a new industry in Massachusetts. Think about that for a moment. The casino owners will spend tens of millions of dollars on construction and then gaming, in a state where jobs have not returned, our population is leaving (see 10 Congressmen) and our college graduates can't find suitable jobs based on their studies.
I don't care if you gamble or not, casinos WILL create jobs! Casinos will grow the tax base of the communities in which they are placed and the state itself. So where's the gamble?
The Governor backed Evergreen Solar as a company of the future because of it was/is in the Green Technology field. Most casinos will do what it can to make a buck including using every type of green technology to reduce its operating costs. Sounds like a company that is sort of in the green technology field. I can tell you this, everyone knew the risk with Evergreen Solar because solar power is not affordable to individuals and corporations with Government grants, and even then it's still risky. So where's the gamble.
Whether you are a supporter or opponent of Casinos, you should be irate over how the Legislature and the Governor have failed to do their jobs and get this issue on center stage so it can be debated, vetted, and voted upon. Win or lose, we the taxpayer deserve a Legislature and Governor that will overturn every rock to explore new employers who will employ us and create a ripple effect of jobs and prosperity in our communities.
So where's the gamble? I think the gamble lies with our elected officials who have taken money from lobbyists to shut this issue down, otherwise there would have been a Casino Bill voted on three years ago!
I know casinos don't work. The new construction at places like Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun casinos is all a sham. I know that the people they employ aren't real. I know that the southeastern Connecticut area would have survived even with all those layoffs from Electric Boat. They just don't work. This must be the viewpoint of every Legislator and the Governor who won't put this up for a vote.
Folks, it's time to call your State Rep, State Senator and the Governor, to demand that they act upon a casino bill and vote it before the Legislative session ends. It is far too important to let it slip away again just like the lobbyists want it to.
A job is a job, especially to someone who can't find one. Tell our elected officials to stop gambling with our economic survival and do what they are elected to do!
Monday, February 21, 2011
Protests - Follow the Money
In a great book by Peter Schewizer titled 'Reagan's War', Mr, Schweizer hits upon the massive "nuclear missile" protests around the world during Reagan's Presidency, and who funded them. With the downfall of the KGB, files were opened which detailed information regarding the funding of these protests by communist governments, and other American enemies.
The book cites numerous examples of the "leaders" of the protests taking money and intelligence information to organize and expand their protests. While a good number of the protesters on the ground doing the chanting and carrying those professionally made signs, may have actually been there to display there disagreement with the policies of their governments, the reality is that the protests were professionally organized. And there is no doubt where the money came from.
What they weren't was spontaneous. And the protests were used by America's enemies to change world opinion and further their cause to weaken America and democracy around the world.
With unbelievable protests in Tunisia and Egypt spreading around the world, we need to take a step back and examine who is really behind them. The people on the ground were definitely protesting, but who sparked the fire? Who helped fund the organization of tens of thousands of people to camp out and protest 24 hours a day, seven days a week? Who was behind the "leaders" of these protests?
The game plan is the same, the players are just different for now. Thirty years ago, it was Communists. Today, it is the Muslim Brotherhood, with Communist governments behind the scenes. Can anyone doubt groups like Move On or Code Pink or any other anti-American group has some involvement in these protests?
What we are seeing unfolding today are anti-American and anti-Isreali factions spurring these massive events in the Middle East. The leaders of these events are using the same tactics that similar groups used during Reagan's Presidency. The difference is the region and the basis for the protests. The backers of these protests are duping the flock utilizing the same methods. Take one hot button issue and exploit it to the nth degree while getting the liberal media to follow like lemmings and turn a blind eye to how they are being organized.
Follow the money.
The book cites numerous examples of the "leaders" of the protests taking money and intelligence information to organize and expand their protests. While a good number of the protesters on the ground doing the chanting and carrying those professionally made signs, may have actually been there to display there disagreement with the policies of their governments, the reality is that the protests were professionally organized. And there is no doubt where the money came from.
What they weren't was spontaneous. And the protests were used by America's enemies to change world opinion and further their cause to weaken America and democracy around the world.
With unbelievable protests in Tunisia and Egypt spreading around the world, we need to take a step back and examine who is really behind them. The people on the ground were definitely protesting, but who sparked the fire? Who helped fund the organization of tens of thousands of people to camp out and protest 24 hours a day, seven days a week? Who was behind the "leaders" of these protests?
The game plan is the same, the players are just different for now. Thirty years ago, it was Communists. Today, it is the Muslim Brotherhood, with Communist governments behind the scenes. Can anyone doubt groups like Move On or Code Pink or any other anti-American group has some involvement in these protests?
What we are seeing unfolding today are anti-American and anti-Isreali factions spurring these massive events in the Middle East. The leaders of these events are using the same tactics that similar groups used during Reagan's Presidency. The difference is the region and the basis for the protests. The backers of these protests are duping the flock utilizing the same methods. Take one hot button issue and exploit it to the nth degree while getting the liberal media to follow like lemmings and turn a blind eye to how they are being organized.
Follow the money.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Gov. To Be A "Travelin' Man"
In a recent article in the Boston Herald
http://bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1315718
it states that the Governor will become a Travelin' Man and hot the road "selling" Massachusetts and expanding our new growth industries...
Now the Guv will be going abroad to do this and to peddle his book I'm sure. But before he goes, I'd like to ask the Governor one little favor -
PLEASE ADDRESS CASINO GAMING AND THE JOBS IT CAN CREATE BEFORE YOU LEAVE TO ENJOY THE PERKS OF YOUR JOB!!!!
I would hope that this missive would spur one Democrat and one Republican in the House to co-sponsor a Bill REQUIRING the Governor to address this issue before he dons sunscreen and racks up the points on his State Issued credit card.
This is a no brainer. Get the Governor to address the one issue he refuses to until the 11th hour NOW!!!
Please, I'm begging someone in the State House to make this Governor work for his travel visas.
Regardless of whether you favor Casino Gaming or not, the citizens of Massachusetts deserve to have the issue debated, vetted, and voted upon by their Representatives and know where they stand. Anything less is a dereliction of duty.
C'mon Guv, let's get some work done before the fun and games!
http://bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1315718
it states that the Governor will become a Travelin' Man and hot the road "selling" Massachusetts and expanding our new growth industries...
Now the Guv will be going abroad to do this and to peddle his book I'm sure. But before he goes, I'd like to ask the Governor one little favor -
PLEASE ADDRESS CASINO GAMING AND THE JOBS IT CAN CREATE BEFORE YOU LEAVE TO ENJOY THE PERKS OF YOUR JOB!!!!
I would hope that this missive would spur one Democrat and one Republican in the House to co-sponsor a Bill REQUIRING the Governor to address this issue before he dons sunscreen and racks up the points on his State Issued credit card.
This is a no brainer. Get the Governor to address the one issue he refuses to until the 11th hour NOW!!!
Please, I'm begging someone in the State House to make this Governor work for his travel visas.
Regardless of whether you favor Casino Gaming or not, the citizens of Massachusetts deserve to have the issue debated, vetted, and voted upon by their Representatives and know where they stand. Anything less is a dereliction of duty.
C'mon Guv, let's get some work done before the fun and games!
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Random "Snowed In" Thoughts
Now that the snowfall is over and the sleet has started, it seems like a good time for some "Snowed In" random thoughts.
Now that Global Warming has been exposed as a fraud and was nothing more than a way to punish America by imposing 'Cap and Trade', moratoriums on drilling for oil (lest the burning of evil fossil fuels turned our planet into red hot Mars), the imposing of new fuel efficiency standards, etc., isn't it amazing how the media and global warming fanatics now cite everything as 'Climate Change'?
Hasn't the climate changed EVERY DAY since the dawn of time? But if you choose a title so vague as 'Climate Change' you can categorize every storm, warm spell, or flood as an affect of man on the climate.
What needs to be done is to classify these Global Warming kooks as a religious sect, because that what this is, and hit them with "separation of church and state" when they come up with Government mandates enforcing their beliefs on the public.
When is history not history? Have you ever turned on the History Channel to see if there is anything interesting on it only to find a non-history show like Monster Quest? Or a topic covering the invasion of wild pigs? Or the history of sex? I understand ratings and why certain programs air, but when history programming becomes a minor part of your daily offerings don't you need to change your moniker? Perhaps to "History Channel - Sometimes" or something to that degree?
When did New Englanders become such wusses? We have snow this winter, a lot of it! And if you turn on any local news you would have thought we live in the South and that the storms we've been getting are once in a hundred year flood type storms. I'm amazed at things like "where are we going to put it all?" How about on the ground? I've heard people actually say it isn't "fair" that we have all this snow. Must have been Liberals, but still, MOVE if you don't think it's "fair". And I love the advice we get from experts. "Don't drive on the icy roads if you don't have to". Or "it's bitterly cold outside make sure you bundle up". No shit. Never thought of that having lived in New England my whole life. THANK YOU!
Folks, we live in a crazy world, but it's been crazy since GOD created it. And it's supposed to be that way or else life would be really boring.
The next "leader" who can stand up and tell people that we have to take personal repsonsibility for our actions and stop blaming oothers for anything that goes wrong, and stop whining about life in America, will be the person who sweeps the country off it's feet.
Enjoy the craziness! Life's too short not to.
Now that Global Warming has been exposed as a fraud and was nothing more than a way to punish America by imposing 'Cap and Trade', moratoriums on drilling for oil (lest the burning of evil fossil fuels turned our planet into red hot Mars), the imposing of new fuel efficiency standards, etc., isn't it amazing how the media and global warming fanatics now cite everything as 'Climate Change'?
Hasn't the climate changed EVERY DAY since the dawn of time? But if you choose a title so vague as 'Climate Change' you can categorize every storm, warm spell, or flood as an affect of man on the climate.
What needs to be done is to classify these Global Warming kooks as a religious sect, because that what this is, and hit them with "separation of church and state" when they come up with Government mandates enforcing their beliefs on the public.
When is history not history? Have you ever turned on the History Channel to see if there is anything interesting on it only to find a non-history show like Monster Quest? Or a topic covering the invasion of wild pigs? Or the history of sex? I understand ratings and why certain programs air, but when history programming becomes a minor part of your daily offerings don't you need to change your moniker? Perhaps to "History Channel - Sometimes" or something to that degree?
When did New Englanders become such wusses? We have snow this winter, a lot of it! And if you turn on any local news you would have thought we live in the South and that the storms we've been getting are once in a hundred year flood type storms. I'm amazed at things like "where are we going to put it all?" How about on the ground? I've heard people actually say it isn't "fair" that we have all this snow. Must have been Liberals, but still, MOVE if you don't think it's "fair". And I love the advice we get from experts. "Don't drive on the icy roads if you don't have to". Or "it's bitterly cold outside make sure you bundle up". No shit. Never thought of that having lived in New England my whole life. THANK YOU!
Folks, we live in a crazy world, but it's been crazy since GOD created it. And it's supposed to be that way or else life would be really boring.
The next "leader" who can stand up and tell people that we have to take personal repsonsibility for our actions and stop blaming oothers for anything that goes wrong, and stop whining about life in America, will be the person who sweeps the country off it's feet.
Enjoy the craziness! Life's too short not to.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Election LOSER Still Serving In MASS HOUSE
Please read this article. If it doesn't make your blood boil, nothing will. Typical liberal bullsh*t in Massachusetts.
RECOUNT LOSER SAYS HE’LL STAY IN HOUSE ‘TIL COURT FIGHT ENDS
By Kyle Cheney
STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE
STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, JAN. 6, 2011…..Citing provisions in the state Constitution, Rep. Geraldo Alicea (D-Charlton) said Thursday he will continue to serve indefinitely in the Massachusetts House even though he lost a recount to Republican Peter Durant by one vote.
Although Alicea wasn’t sworn in with his colleagues Wednesday, he will continue to represent the Sixth Worcester district while a court challenge over the outcome of the recount is pending.
“If Peter prevails as the winner, I will be the first to shake his hand and congratulate him. We’re not there yet,” Alicea said in a phone interview. “Right now we’re in court. That’s pretty much where we have to go. People are seeing democracy at its best.”
After a December recount showed Durant winning by a single vote, Alicea petitioned Worcester Superior Court to include an absentee ballot that had been thrown out by election officials. If the court allows the ballot, a tie vote would necessitate a new election. The candidates are due in court by Jan. 14, although Alicea said the date could be moved up.
Durant told the News Service that Alicea shouldn’t be permitted to serve as a holdover.
“Here’s a guy who didn’t win basically continuing to serve and draw a paycheck that he doesn’t deserve,” he said in a phone interview. “In a body that’s been plagued by scandals it seems to just be another one.”
Durant said Alicea should consider forgoing his salary to acknowledge the uncertainty of the election. He said that he intends to ask colleagues to file legislation for him in advance of a Jan. 21 filing deadline. He also disputed Alicea’s contention that the court battle was “democracy at its best.”
“For democracy to be served, what we need to do is listen to the people,” Durant said. “The people have voted. There’s been a recount. I’ve been declared the winner and yet he’s the guy who’s in that seat.”
Alicea said he is unsure whether his powers as a state representative will change during the holdover period and said he intends to consult with House Clerk Steven James.
“For me, I’ve just been focusing one step at a time,” he said, “ensuring that every vote’s counted.”
The House clerk told the News Service that the constitution is unequivocal about permitting Alicea to continue serving until he or a successor is sworn in for a new term.
“There’s no choice to be made here. It’s under the Constitution. There’s no other option,” James said. “There’s no wiggle room here. The Constitution provides for this to protect the district and make sure they have representation.”
Alicea said he hadn’t spoken to Durant since the recount in December.
Alicea’s situation bears striking resemblance to 2003, when Rep. Matthew Patrick continued to serve even though the outcome of his Cape Cod election was disputed in court. Citing Article 64 of the constitution, which allows members to serve until their successors are sworn in and qualified by the House, Patrick continued to receive a paycheck and was allowed to vote in the House even though he was not sworn in for a new term. Ultimately, the court ordered a new election but the House ignored the order and opted to seat Patrick, who had won a recount by 17 votes.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo has said he intends to wait for the court’s decision before deciding who should be sworn in to represent Sixth Worcester district, which includes Charlton, East Brookfield, Southbridge and portions of Oxford and Spencer.
According to a spokeswoman, Alicea opted against attending Wednesday’s swearing-in of members of the House, which included a vote for speaker of the House, “out of respect for the House.”
“He did not want to draw any attention away from the swearing-in ceremony,” said the spokeswoman, Karen Sharma.
House Minority Leader Brad Jones said in December that Alicea should not be sworn in or “allowed to serve in the same capacity as Matt Patrick.” He said that if anyone were seated on a temporary basis, it should be Durant.
Rep. Paul Frost (R-Auburn) said permitting Alicea to continue serving is consistent with precedent.
“What it looks like from past practice and within the constitution, it appears that Rep. Alicea may be carried over,” he said. “He can still serve as the legislator until this is all ironed out. I think, if that’s the way the policy, the rule is … I guess there is no issue there.”
Frost added, “I still think Peter Durant’s going to be here.”
RECOUNT LOSER SAYS HE’LL STAY IN HOUSE ‘TIL COURT FIGHT ENDS
By Kyle Cheney
STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE
STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, JAN. 6, 2011…..Citing provisions in the state Constitution, Rep. Geraldo Alicea (D-Charlton) said Thursday he will continue to serve indefinitely in the Massachusetts House even though he lost a recount to Republican Peter Durant by one vote.
Although Alicea wasn’t sworn in with his colleagues Wednesday, he will continue to represent the Sixth Worcester district while a court challenge over the outcome of the recount is pending.
“If Peter prevails as the winner, I will be the first to shake his hand and congratulate him. We’re not there yet,” Alicea said in a phone interview. “Right now we’re in court. That’s pretty much where we have to go. People are seeing democracy at its best.”
After a December recount showed Durant winning by a single vote, Alicea petitioned Worcester Superior Court to include an absentee ballot that had been thrown out by election officials. If the court allows the ballot, a tie vote would necessitate a new election. The candidates are due in court by Jan. 14, although Alicea said the date could be moved up.
Durant told the News Service that Alicea shouldn’t be permitted to serve as a holdover.
“Here’s a guy who didn’t win basically continuing to serve and draw a paycheck that he doesn’t deserve,” he said in a phone interview. “In a body that’s been plagued by scandals it seems to just be another one.”
Durant said Alicea should consider forgoing his salary to acknowledge the uncertainty of the election. He said that he intends to ask colleagues to file legislation for him in advance of a Jan. 21 filing deadline. He also disputed Alicea’s contention that the court battle was “democracy at its best.”
“For democracy to be served, what we need to do is listen to the people,” Durant said. “The people have voted. There’s been a recount. I’ve been declared the winner and yet he’s the guy who’s in that seat.”
Alicea said he is unsure whether his powers as a state representative will change during the holdover period and said he intends to consult with House Clerk Steven James.
“For me, I’ve just been focusing one step at a time,” he said, “ensuring that every vote’s counted.”
The House clerk told the News Service that the constitution is unequivocal about permitting Alicea to continue serving until he or a successor is sworn in for a new term.
“There’s no choice to be made here. It’s under the Constitution. There’s no other option,” James said. “There’s no wiggle room here. The Constitution provides for this to protect the district and make sure they have representation.”
Alicea said he hadn’t spoken to Durant since the recount in December.
Alicea’s situation bears striking resemblance to 2003, when Rep. Matthew Patrick continued to serve even though the outcome of his Cape Cod election was disputed in court. Citing Article 64 of the constitution, which allows members to serve until their successors are sworn in and qualified by the House, Patrick continued to receive a paycheck and was allowed to vote in the House even though he was not sworn in for a new term. Ultimately, the court ordered a new election but the House ignored the order and opted to seat Patrick, who had won a recount by 17 votes.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo has said he intends to wait for the court’s decision before deciding who should be sworn in to represent Sixth Worcester district, which includes Charlton, East Brookfield, Southbridge and portions of Oxford and Spencer.
According to a spokeswoman, Alicea opted against attending Wednesday’s swearing-in of members of the House, which included a vote for speaker of the House, “out of respect for the House.”
“He did not want to draw any attention away from the swearing-in ceremony,” said the spokeswoman, Karen Sharma.
House Minority Leader Brad Jones said in December that Alicea should not be sworn in or “allowed to serve in the same capacity as Matt Patrick.” He said that if anyone were seated on a temporary basis, it should be Durant.
Rep. Paul Frost (R-Auburn) said permitting Alicea to continue serving is consistent with precedent.
“What it looks like from past practice and within the constitution, it appears that Rep. Alicea may be carried over,” he said. “He can still serve as the legislator until this is all ironed out. I think, if that’s the way the policy, the rule is … I guess there is no issue there.”
Frost added, “I still think Peter Durant’s going to be here.”
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)